Re: [Json] Counterproposal on work items

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Wed, 27 February 2013 16:44 UTC

Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.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 8B24821F8667 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 08:44:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.409
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.409 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.190, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 OgvlFo+8xxHW for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 08:44:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7628C21F862B for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 08:44:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r1RGikkC010091 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:44:46 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1361983486; bh=bFe3O+Chk6qMWejUNvENuNqJjTq6k+iLi4ZMRmXLDnU=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=HSn6ddAXpX8J5odBIJZBfh3HbbPIWeXdLeAtFtGiMLhhOtQFcykdYBGcIy1hxM7XN ewrAj01oY3rfrdPiZFXDUbUFceDnKHi09oYLBP2O7wjqb6nZnH+qcdMneCyIr+I0Lj p7Xs3yrDBxdZ8fsN0IhQyu3kNIZwnQFSlE71iWwg=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>, "'Paul Hoffman'" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
References: <CAHBU6ityBeA+M-PEme09gO_jVySr33-X308i1UttxrQwSgYmGQ@mail.gmail.com> <0F513426-F26D-48F4-A7A8-88F3D3DA881B@vpnc.org> <CAK3OfOjFCnR8k1csVOkSKTDpA8exDvYdAijn80HKD5zwNzzeSw@mail.gmail.com> <4514F5D7-4A7E-476F-987D-C4C617F2BCBD@vpnc.org> <4D80AE86-4DBA-4236-9E2A-A06F2F9C30F7@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D80AE86-4DBA-4236-9E2A-A06F2F9C30F7@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:44:53 -0500
Message-ID: <00b001ce1509$c4c99fc0$4e5cdf40$@packetizer.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQJmlHHeuQsFbaCuWES9MqWLBpmfyQGang29AdmZMiIDQRCvmgOfBT/QlwpHjDA=
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: json@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Json] Counterproposal on work items
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:44:57 -0000

Mark,

> I don't know. I think I'd be fine if we just asked Crockford (perhaps
> helped by a willing editor) to do 4627bis and then have the AD sponsor
> it on Standards Track.

I did ask him.  I actually asked him about updating it even before I had
heard about the JSON BoF.  He indicated that he is willing to work on it "as
long as it does not break compatibility with existing implementations."

As editor, I think he would be in a good position to ensure that his
requirement is met.

Paul