Re: [Json] Comments on proposed charter for JSON

"Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com> Fri, 01 March 2013 17:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mamille2@cisco.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 C6EBE21F9359 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:36:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 aJtK8jfjVY8X for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:36:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09DA421F9355 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:36:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4485; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1362159402; x=1363369002; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=kdcEPnOcBwkPVW4N+uPabp8+qpLAWJky+K/2T0jzT5c=; b=WkH9z3eWV9cRIdYV+KL3TI9HrgeM7FSTjo9SfmCBJnKfLIeQLpe6iCr1 SyoC/g2wcyu5T8Qd+HxYTcuKnqVY5vN8YpAeUGtS6eg3TK1AdHd9o3/qa NnhZFneqUILha2nzJOeQKKMF72x2N51JriRtnR2ebYl/6ij77qx/fHPIb 8=;
X-Files: smime.p7s : 2283
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkAFAGPmMFGtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABEhgi8M34Wc4IfAQEBAwF5BQsCAQgiJAIwJQIEDgUIBgaHeQbBJo5sMQeCX2EDjyiBJpZggwiCJw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.84,762,1355097600"; d="p7s'?scan'208"; a="179738569"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2013 17:36:41 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com [173.36.12.81]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r21Hafg6016807 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 1 Mar 2013 17:36:41 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com ([169.254.6.203]) by xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com ([173.36.12.81]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:36:41 -0600
From: "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Thread-Topic: [Json] Comments on proposed charter for JSON
Thread-Index: AQHOFh2sw1yCCbVghkiyxCFY7/PbTZiRP4sAgAA+FQCAAAFjAA==
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 17:36:41 +0000
Message-ID: <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED941151568D7@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130228170825.09fcfa20@elandnews.com> <CAC4RtVCWPp1LA_NCqdzpRetPbsoZ=fBb0APWr8=MoJqe8RxkTQ@mail.gmail.com> <4F511CA8-1FC1-46AF-BC22-C64F2C63C052@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F511CA8-1FC1-46AF-BC22-C64F2C63C052@vpnc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.129.24.88]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DA3EF8E9-C875-4983-B20A-34D208C534D3"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "<json@ietf.org>" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Comments on proposed charter for JSON
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: Fri, 01 Mar 2013 17:36:42 -0000

On Mar 1, 2013, at 10:31 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
 wrote:

> I made two more small changes to the proposed charter; comments are welcome.
> 
> - Changed the community review sentence to say "There are also a number of other JSON-related proposals for Standards Track that would benefit from review from both the IETF and the larger JSON-using communities created by a working group focused on JSON" to indicate that we would benefit from JSON-using developers who are currently not active in the IETF.
> 
> - Changed the "breaking compatibility" sentence to say "Any changes that break compatibility with existing implementations will need to have very strong justification and broad support, and will have to be documented in the new RFC" to make it clear that the resulting RFC should make any changes clear.


+1


- m&m

Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com >
Cisco Systems, Inc.