Re: [Json] The names within an object SHOULD be unique.

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Thu, 06 June 2013 23:03 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CAE211E80A4 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Aur6+MpRNTuY for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a31.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcaid.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3409D21F998A for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a31.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a31.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB811202038 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=kK5WAdvif8P21JYdVZtx US9CpEs=; b=bkQvNelShhYwaMmTIu1+L8WDJXs6yHMPw9bmGusiz7F/TnYwzF93 XrdrTRhjl+bgUWCJ/VHUk5xas/Gt0gdEbnUdZbQkbJ54rqz21QrlWoK04rRELIbd POmLiQcG+F9CVdavGhmuRAhV7eYZDbDW/2Q9AgUl2U8S/S6MbUCV6Qc=
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com [209.85.212.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a31.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8475B202022 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id cb5so729172wib.9 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 16:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ImyhBYgmP/usf9pS/wRV7yj3LEAhoS1JpYXslYRZ1mk=; b=L6SHWlr5YZjIMUNJDVMaYdaRqLxPbEGSUXM0Phli1Zo+KzzItDKjNsIKxi1/2cq2yT 80+mS9H74F/86SXgtmLJlGRuV6FgsvrQzTx45ersE9S1Tev/9gl133XC77c5fMnzaw+r SawQ2/brNI1PfdkTHpEQ5FrRMimbHwWK6Hu9nCQP0tedG54ekIruMpv6uqMhWVgUHd63 lwWZhfcYsVoBT+s9Y5yEn4XweiHn5ssnTeMOVWKCmpdY77qIjDlF/c8J0tVU8JED0nlH c3CY/H8+MA9ierHZ8PXMNxSS8Rg9zbc4xzaynT1WQCXn07jEg6LhL60xJFDQglR6ud6e 7mug==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.79.74 with SMTP id h10mr2478195wjx.84.1370559795341; Thu, 06 Jun 2013 16:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.63.136 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 16:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8DF516C4-109F-487D-84C8-DC1AEF04A324@vpnc.org>
References: <51AF8479.5080002@crockford.com> <CAK3OfOgtYoPRZ-Gj5G8AnNipDyxYs=6_KD=rQTxKbhDPX6FZNA@mail.gmail.com> <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411527EF7B@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <CAK3OfOhFpzWzdzdQ99O--daKUd4nSVRDWVU8EoyQou-S+CYn+A@mail.gmail.com> <8DF516C4-109F-487D-84C8-DC1AEF04A324@vpnc.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:03:15 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjVRBGpKFpLpH5=QfxopzJEOWWen_f90DnDKuYwPz+eGA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] The names within an object SHOULD be unique.
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 06 Jun 2013 23:03:27 -0000

On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> <co-chair hat on>
>
> Some of the recent comments on this thread have gone down the path of naming different types of parsers and saying they might have different rules because of their capabilities.
>
> Do we really want to do that for what is supposed to be a minimal update of the spec? (That is a leading question, but "yes" is an acceptable answer if it justified.)

So far I think there's only two types of encoders and decoders:
streaming and non-streaming.  I don't think we'll see more types.  If
the list stays short, then "yes".

> Proposal: we simply list what we want encoders and parsers to do without saying what type of encoder, or what type of parser, gets to do what.

I would like to say that those parsers than can MUST accept only the
last value.  I would also like to not preclude parsers that can't even
detect duplicates keys (streaming parsers).

I would like to say that encoders that can MUST NOT send duplicate
keys.  I would also like to not preclude encoders that can't even
detect that they are sending duplicate keys.

Nico
--