Re: [Json] REMINDER - WGLC Ends 2013-10-11

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 11 October 2013 23:19 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 7E6EC11E8174 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 16:19:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.158
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.158 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.091, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id msKmI3Yha0XA for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 16:19:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3CB411E819A for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 16:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9BNJM5J001492; Sat, 12 Oct 2013 01:19:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.217.105] (p54890CAC.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.137.12.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 583A3D13; Sat, 12 Oct 2013 01:19:22 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CB150F21-4BE6-4DE6-BCA2-1DBDDCC3F86E@wirfs-brock.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 01:19:21 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2DBB0D99-FC9C-4D7E-BE6F-11A96684FEF1@tzi.org>
References: <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411EF4E2DB@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411EF549AB@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <CB150F21-4BE6-4DE6-BCA2-1DBDDCC3F86E@wirfs-brock.com>
To: Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: JSON WG <json@ietf.org>, "Matt Miller \(mamille2\)" <mamille2@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Json] REMINDER - WGLC Ends 2013-10-11
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 23:19:41 -0000

On Oct 12, 2013, at 01:00, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com> wrote:

> Notational preference

The ABNF actually means something.

If we were arguing this, I'd say that while the JSON grammar is simple enough that the racetracks (plus the explanatory text) should not be overly problematic, it would have been better if ECMA-404 had used them as illustrations only and referenced RFC 4627 for the normative grammar (as amended for the gratuitous change).

But since Tim is right, we don't need to argue this.

Grüße, Carsten