IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Thu, 20 February 2014 03:11 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45DE71A03CF for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 19:11:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nlia1NkNfl9Y for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 19:11:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25AF31A00F5 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 19:11:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-67.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.67]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.8/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s1K3BJ9I048586 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Feb 2014 20:11:20 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-1-98-67.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.67] claimed to be [10.20.30.90]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAAQiQRd+73e-qPeyEcYfScho1Y+DYjVHgzRJ2mYQ0tFwB3Zm0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 19:11:19 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F7DA83E1-BCB8-4593-BA0E-893F98057699@vpnc.org>
References: <9D584FB2-134A-4D0F-8636-4521CE7B7FA0@vpnc.org> <CAAQiQRd+73e-qPeyEcYfScho1Y+DYjVHgzRJ2mYQ0tFwB3Zm0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/9NcvI5OZZlcXeu1QzDQ2zl0Zmbc
Cc: JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 03:11:30 -0000

On Feb 19, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> wrote:

> I wouldn't mind 10 minutes to explain the motivations behind the JSON
> Content Rules draft, many of which parallel some of the excellent
> points that have been made in this thread.

Excellent, thanks! This discussion is getting fairly wide-ranging, so have one or two more short presentations in London might help people in the room catch up with some of the high points.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email