IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8259 (7650)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 20 September 2023 15:10 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 350CAC151541 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 08:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J9VF2Kk2Q5Tb for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 08:10:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB161C15108F for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 08:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.124] (p548dc15c.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.193.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4RrMQt4WMkzDCfm; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 17:10:14 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230920145716.EEC11E5EAB@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 17:10:13 +0200
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, superuser@gmail.com, francesca.palombini@ericsson.com, linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net, lucastesson@protonmail.com, json@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 716915413.45219-f088b7ff57cd4b294949307ace2c84c1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2E8A9E99-D72C-40C9-BA39-CFAE0743E977@tzi.org>
References: <20230920145716.EEC11E5EAB@rfcpa.amsl.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/BDjQVBx5wD7cXerCT-KoWj1o9CU>
Subject: Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8259 (7650)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 15:10:23 -0000

Interesting.

I don’t read RFC 5234 to imply that Core Rules (B.1) are always present; these are just useful rules that can be imported when needed.  (This is supported by B saying "Note that these rules are only valid for ABNF encoded in 7-bit ASCII or in characters sets that are a superset of 7-bit ASCII.”, so these rules appear to have been designed with limited applicability in mind.)

RFC 8259 does not define DIGIT or HEXDIG; the assumption here seems to be that those come from the Core Rules.  This does not appear to be said in the document, which maybe is the real errata behind this report.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email