Re: [Json] A possible summary of the discussion so far on code points and characters

Stephen Dolan <> Sat, 08 June 2013 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C317721F944F for <>; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 14:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.331
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.331 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.757, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8+Z+YZmmGAo0 for <>; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 14:11:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D0F21F93DA for <>; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 14:11:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id er20so4726580lab.17 for <>; Sat, 08 Jun 2013 14:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=B4F758WYz8uYryhj4BukisHPp3crH3z0dtcoGz7YZe0=; b=mPD/HdUAuvEhixQAPBRLCSR5kKjaNJxs0PTSZFFx6b/TbzikopgV6dHt/97iDiUTKV YgSnGKJJdkceXjVVctMRaHgshCeGNGle21dywchKTAoM5AcEP1IP7gbzuDJVCQvn4nXg xGVRjrPieQGaxy2LuUx2uxCL/UL4sYyCiw4DLZVcP9iYi5BdJ9Bz/H9hnvxFCrDoSb6u pox+RZeXUNMAmaE5GQMz9PXT3tOBMJftQ9nGObw8UWxYoQNf0aK3keYFNwJ/lPq3lk7l m6v5pA+csl8iqgAUn1fzZbI1uVVU3G7Cr9OVjj4U2g+1MEUmgVCdsgy/fFkjD0jzA+i2 +agQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id xd9mr3171919lbb.43.1370725886931; Sat, 08 Jun 2013 14:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 14:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: []
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 22:11:26 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: QejsPXhyH9L7K5y51roIgl3zr5w
Message-ID: <>
From: Stephen Dolan <>
To: R S <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmH45346bv8Fg6WAxsa7oNDdSDvaJ2wJdq+pvg74lza58j7aLwh7dGZDSNffvsXeqSbxRKr
Cc: Paul Hoffman <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [Json] A possible summary of the discussion so far on code points and characters
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 21:11:33 -0000

On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:52 PM, R S <> wrote:
> A seventh point of view, which I happen to agree with: JSON strings are a
> sequence of code units.
> This is similar to the definition of 'source text' in ECMAScript:
> "ECMAScript source text is assumed to be a sequence of 16-bit code units for
> the purposes of this specification. Such a source text may include sequences
> of 16-bit code units that are not valid UTF-16 character encodings."

That's a very out-of-context quote. The linked document states:

"ECMAScript source text is represented as a sequence of characters in
the Unicode character encoding, version 3.0 or later."

It then gives your quote, and states "If an actual source text is
encoded in a form other than 16-bit code units it must be processed as
if it was first convert [sic] to UTF-16". It seems like UTF-16 is a
convenient way to frame the document, rather than a requirement of the