Re: [Json] Proposal: the minimal edit

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

I meant Surrogates or Noncharacters (per Unicode section 2.4). -T


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Norbert Lindenberg <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> On Jun 24, 2013, at 16:42 , Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> > On Jun 24, 2013, at 4:35 PM, John Cowan <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >> Tim Bray scripsit:
> >>
> >>> In general I’d support this, with one nit: s/that are not Unicode
> >>> characters/that can never be Unicode characters/ (just to make it clear
> >>> we’re not talking about unassigned code points, which don't seem to
> >>> distress anyone).
> >>
> >> Well, that excludes not only surrogate code points, which are the really
> >> dangerous ones (because they have no standard representation) but
> non-character
> >> code points as well, which shouldn't be interchanged but aren't actually
> >> dangerous.  I don't know if you mean to do that or not.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "exclude". The sentence Tim was referring
> to is about inclusion:
> >
> >  - ECMAScript implementations can generate and consume code points in
> JSON strings that are not
> >    Unicode characters.
>
> Which definition of "Unicode character" are the three of you referring to?
>
> Thanks,
> Norbert
>
>