Re: [Json] Counterproposal #2 on work items

Vinny A <jsontest@yahoo.com> Thu, 21 February 2013 04:02 UTC

Return-Path: <jsontest@yahoo.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 EB87621F8D94 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:02:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_34=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dAWxESoKsdOj for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:02:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nm9-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm9-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9E021F8D0D for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:02:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [98.138.226.178] by nm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Feb 2013 04:02:14 -0000
Received: from [98.138.87.6] by tm13.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Feb 2013 04:02:14 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Feb 2013 04:02:14 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 127388.53648.bm@omp1006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 62560 invoked by uid 60001); 21 Feb 2013 04:02:13 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1361419333; bh=xYtELIKjjoCF1tZ8R8ECNtyE9j+Aglw6ehSd8jvrxM4=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jNKsn66c4FARY2g2qh7f0N23XS+SD0wgZfZ41gIBplhd5ogr+sa0kWM/D3imCI6PQJ3CmyEyq2q4zCNitxrh254cskbeWLaQethyuIa5e0Q49HPDz7aOHGMkektSaku9H2k+nmL18ofZMlqkx57gQX3EbpBSSyT90aIvl5vqfq0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=m1mur2sn/a7hs3ivf+/mJsMpBVKjFo8izDhBbv6uNGwx7eNyRnLgy2/z6hWohYzrSyQD7wqt5bWxUbqs1uJ1R5ly6V68WjLxHIvwmiIsePuZL71vmbG6+IW/ldV+DIHx3CH/L2hKoaWZszSyKMM64CtdIYEcV7L0ygI9Kdn/4lM=;
X-YMail-OSG: JyBf_FoVM1mQB49E75g04qc6zhBDQxb5hBTfJq.Ulkr.Xan uAEzK4KgaCvTlBZrCyS7MSrwB_OFDhw3QxGJDbA3AFQ7kzY6wTZSUm78hLCy 6rjOkCKUHlCsDan8Thgb2krJql0qjEuEbEUib3o6_65_pFnZFg6y9QaO0LW5 jngHr96oOXHg5Udk2RwGzQzAV2J_XyJ26j5HLgo5E7_2ridcJRbFHcon7dbt HolkAE.xz0fkyNe8FbGlrdwvCj7.d2OS61BYCKlJ4R5wVmzvQaU.0Sfo37H3 t8_VTie8TeLgbnRjitN486Yi_F8RbuAzxXaWmNq_pADwFF_FmBTSc7rDnMGU 9NMMYA09uA_YQmSMeF1uiyj9sYIxN7BpWDIXJmWbR172hWU3J.WqPFiD15PG 6ZoML46U7o9KB.sM3aP.gf6XH42dGoD7cYkllGGYU5dWcaY7wlXs5gOi4RYp uVYwC.fEHvfuVbRY3dmoVRBmy2qajFmXkKsX0p5JN.eZe2.YKDnIS2ibOVp6 LoMxs5yXE50jm6LRz2iAivwl9DYFlrUmxzt0QulL_cEQc0.uj
Received: from [76.29.100.42] by web125604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:02:13 PST
X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 001.001, PiBPbiBGZWIgMjAsIDIwMTMsIGF0IDI6MzkgUE0sIEZyYW5jaXMgR2FsaWVndWUgPGZnYWxpZWd1ZUBnbWFpbC5jb20.IHdyb3RlOgo.SXNuJ3QgdGhhdCBvcmcuanNvbj8gSSByZWNhbGwgaGF2aW5nIHNlZW4gdGhhdCBhcyB3ZWxsLi4uIEkga25vdyBmb3Igc3VyZSB0aGF0IEphY2tzb24gcGlja3MgdGhlIGxhc3Qga2V5L3ZhbHVlIHBhaXIuIEJ1dCB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbSBpcyBpbmRlZWQgdGhhdCB0aGUgImFwcGVuZCB0byBhbiBhcnJheSIgcGFyc2VyIGRvZXMgbm90aGluZyBpbGxlZ2FsIHBlciBzZSAtLSABMAEBAQE-
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.134.513
References: <CALcybBC87P7FT7n5d8xmXMxSFU1LBS9eJUsRX4hfYP5CUJr3QA@mail.gmail.com> <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F89B751@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <CALcybBBSL3w1-JRzUVWMmfS+jzytKNOv6omD1cR+_CLjze6WsA@mail.gmail.com> <12CE5BFB-49C5-48D0-96DF-F78F0D60578A@yahoo.com> <CALcybBCJ=z6u=1CGURB4ECoOaOA1igDy0H64fRm5Sj1HWQcRCg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1361419333.51990.YahooMailNeo@web125604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:02:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Vinny A <jsontest@yahoo.com>
To: Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALcybBCJ=z6u=1CGURB4ECoOaOA1igDy0H64fRm5Sj1HWQcRCg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-685807438-367120970-1361419333=:51990"
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, "Joe Hildebrand \(jhildebr\)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Counterproposal #2 on work items
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Vinny A <jsontest@yahoo.com>
List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." <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, 21 Feb 2013 04:02:16 -0000

> On Feb 20, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> wrote:
>Isn't that org.json? I recall having seen that as well... I know for sure that Jackson picks the last key/value pair. But the problem is indeed that the "append to an array" parser does nothing illegal per se -- basically, as RFC 4627 stands today, the behaviour of parsers with regards to duplicate object member names is undefined.
 
I believe org.json throws a exception if it hits a duplicated key; at least the documentation [ http://json.org/javadoc/org/json/JSONObject.html#JSONObject(java.lang.String) ] suggests that to be the case. I don't remember where I saw the append to array parser - but it's such a good idea it's worth bringing up in this conversation.
 
>And some existing I-Ds, such as JSON Patch, as a result, have felt compelled to say that a JSON Patch operation, for instance, must have one and only one member named "op". Which imposes constraints on _parsing_ that RFC 4627 does not...
 
Which is precisely why I'd like to see a recommendation regarding duplicated keys. To be honest, I like the idea of array conversion, but I can understand if others dislike it. I work with JSON quite a bit, and it would be nice to be able to point to a documented, recommended spec.
 
-----------
-Vinny A