Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3907)

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

On this issue, also please read the interoperability note in the paragraph
before the new production.


On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Paul E. Jones <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I've not been following the list closely, as I thought this was more of an
> editorial exercise than anything else.  This is definitely more than
> editorial.  This could definitely break things and the commenter is right
> that there are instances where there could be misinterpretation.
>
> Why was it decided to change this:
>
>     JSON-text = object / array
>
> to
>
>     JSON-text = ws value ws
>
> Was there some misunderstanding of what 4627 said?
>
> Paul
>
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <[e-mail]>
> To: "RFC Errata System" <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Sent: 3/2/2014 4:31:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3907)
>
>  * RFC Errata System wrote:
>>
>>> Since RFC7158 breaks compatibility with the specifications, this should
>>> be
>>> duly noted.
>>>
>>
>> It is in Appendix A., "Changes from RFC 4627":
>>
>>    o Changed the definition of "JSON text" so that it can be any JSON
>>       value, removing the constraint that it be an object or array.
>>
>> Failing to note this in the Introduction is not ideal, but the errata
>> system is not a good place to record that (holding it for document up-
>> date probably does not make sense, if and when the document does get
>> updated, this particular issue will not require prominent notice).
>> --
>> Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[e-mail] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
>> Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: [phone] · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
>> 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> json mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>
>
>