IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Proposed Wording for New WG Charter

Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com> Tue, 18 March 2014 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <mamille2@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 907CD1A0429 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.027
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.027 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YkSSwlj0hF2K for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6B0E1A0421 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1309; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1395157985; x=1396367585; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:cc:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pWWDZFSWvlVfZPsIuFDO+h1nFYSDvolCrCcSre1wDrQ=; b=fzjN8XOitlGFl9Qmlhp4722FZFjf+GVeSMBMAFZlZZfIkwh8002uYshD xk39LQPPZdWy3FDe9LJ8kWy/xwD7u5rEG2/R05wI7uOVIFBMMQqeaeZMO NohiOMkmh+vK0A6bkzNm7nSmZlog9Ce3zsQeQ+2z4iiD1UQjxAzlm2Gm6 k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ar8aAPxqKFOtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABagwY7V4MGpgoEmQ4lfhZ0gh0IAQEBBCMPAUUBEAsYAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUTAQUCAQEXhVuCA61JojgXgSmNBjMHgm8PgToBA4lSjnSSMINMggw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,678,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="28377575"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Mar 2014 15:53:05 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com [173.37.183.79]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s2IFr5H3016166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 15:53:05 GMT
Received: from MAMILLE2-M-T03K.local (64.101.72.44) by xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (173.37.183.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:53:05 -0500
Message-ID: <53286BE2.3020409@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:53:06 -0600
From: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
References: <53277484.70305@cisco.com> <5327F05E.7060905@gmx.de> <EC3168FE-EA36-4036-8B36-974FDA7BD88E@vpnc.org> <532864FC.8040700@gmx.de> <CE6D04D1-C063-41E6-A635-3AD8127B6F28@vpnc.org> <5328687D.9050509@gmx.de> <CAHBU6ivhKzENAEkm174=o=QYs8Xj1BS4Rfw0CX_C6bnNP2riNw@mail.gmail.com> <53286A3E.3000907@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <53286A3E.3000907@gmx.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [64.101.72.44]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/K-bdE58IT_pKdkSEdaws2jhfVRM
Subject: Re: [Json] Proposed Wording for New WG Charter
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 15:53:15 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 3/18/14, 9:46 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2014-03-18 16:40, Tim Bray wrote:
>> It also needs some evidence that there’s actually a real-world
>> need, and that this isn’t just another solution in search of a
>> problem.  I haven’t seen any such evidence yet.
> 
> The evidence is that people are abusing application/json for PATCH 
> requests already. The semantics of that is undefined right now.
> 

/me doffs hat

Teams I have worked with are already making use of json-merge-patch,
after abusing application/json in exactly this way.


- -- 
- - m&m

Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com >
Cisco Systems, Inc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTKGviAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO1HBgH/03rzFMv1FGs10Cqz+pm+R//
UBIRS+8apYIb0UWoXBSzht4/WCllsRmYYKDLpLbd+iU0g9QnPo1vWdm36EpjBnwY
ozmNHHlgPrjoIWje2l13yUoQaFoYEb+iZGPLljcItqEnlgpOqdw288DkwuxhLDki
kVG8vIlgniTLNhndH3iLAjhdU9r94RaxCkk93kH7J+xSkQKUe+VVtgbfvuIYu7Ar
mCxba/+oQE7I3agvRGmfuiGfJ6bFX6DGYoUVH/6+X2ivyjjubEHmC2QfJkRYcwdf
gryMiYx8REauUMw6bAJ8o0IPB8ujTqHBxBvKlvO50szsgh/AOCrME57wD8irrGQ=
=5KYc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.16.0 | Report a Bug | By Email