Re: [Json] 2-step proposal 4627bis + I-JSON

+1, although I'd strongly suggest that the top-level value NOT be a boolean, but instead an object; lots of people have talked about a top-level _"meta" object to hold information like profile identity, and if we're going to go to the trouble of defining something that intrudes into content, we might as well just do it once.

Cheers,

On 04/07/2013, at 9:46 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

> I look forward to hearing what path Pete suggests through the thicket.  Here’s one that I think is plausible:
> 
> 1. Do a 4267bis along the lines of the minimal-work proposals. It describes JSON as she are spoke (wildly successful), changes as little as we possibly can, documents the areas of interoperability breakage (dupes, surrogates, top-level primitives), whacks the  regex in the security section, uses SHOULD in the manner that Pete suggested is perfectly kosher. Declare victory!
> 
> 2. Recharter in a way that will allow us to produce something like a strawman I cooked up, I-JSON: https://www.tbray.org/tmp/i-json.html  Produce something like that. Second victory!
> 
>  -T
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/