Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding"

Joe Hildebrand <hildjj@cursive.net> Wed, 10 May 2017 17:42 UTC

Return-Path: <hildjj@cursive.net>
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 C0752129B37 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.489
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=cursive.net
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 eH-dmZ4_J2eX for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B55961286B2 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id l14so1504684ywk.1 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cursive.net; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DOk9w5Sf6EGE9D6d8xpJK24ep7k55wQGz714/RV21Kk=; b=SVN0soZaFQUYAr2vfon4t1je689wRdj9Vso6vRzRxjaSUBwLrw44J+J1uoGGIFyPX6 WVhOMJvaK8TQIztY9Bxl9f0mPzb2lLD9fV+uKQwS5rd5ac0BE+eqaIKF4nvMJTqLHgV/ B8dRulQ73OsrBj2wacW/VZU1sQ+cKhK1xUeXs=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DOk9w5Sf6EGE9D6d8xpJK24ep7k55wQGz714/RV21Kk=; b=sSxOH5FzbYPkOwaqD47+ve/cycG9q26hHmsjFFzu1PbVPtve68YsbAwoFKf0j64Pb8 4AjHYe+A4+PHUKqa1iO9cODpctLmexs7nYjAGoaIp932rFFFEuTsUiF70Z8in2PuN/Yd dB0X6KL94c1Mxuym43lw5vkZWkyBoUzC9K6Mpz2ZMxODncrjEBBpz2Nw//BXlkxJ0XUp cr021nFIL8TKCqKM9DFsSHZc5avGmJjwNd3Dc7+77hIcUKnIdZpxRKK1s54AzVeRMcZA 9j+ha8gKeXqIHJkLjv/mjxGuSsT55M8AgQ8AjsKBRgJPpi0vbsPd89WwXEaLWGEO8Rfb UNSA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDv6q7jEyyBOqgTD0jWgMCpl9OxzlObKZiUmqadTJBoFVgON0Pu 6XSoVgRXd2Fr6LfW7Wc=
X-Received: by 10.13.211.134 with SMTP id v128mr5766065ywd.110.1494438172944; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.6.21.8] ([128.177.113.102]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d136sm1727013ywh.75.2017.05.10.10.42.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Joe Hildebrand <hildjj@cursive.net>
In-Reply-To: <ac1d1b68-67e7-c19f-a556-280df73f465b@outer-planes.net>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:42:50 -0600
Cc: Pete Cordell <petejson@codalogic.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <12DDC578-D7A3-4B30-926B-CEBC3F805BE9@cursive.net>
References: <e69d7c21-85cb-45f4-c0c2-34c624e63049@outer-planes.net> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <CAHBU6ivsq8+Z=MMkUH+=Q0uwc5NCtaJLYw5cp0Qg8eX2hQQ6sA@mail.gmail.com> <b74cb31b-8e04-17d0-548a-fc164ce07c05@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <eabbccb0-8d15-d595-7cd0-37acc0621c57@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <bb9fead6-23e7-8c1d-bc80-b60c81c4b89a@codalogic.com> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <be4d9f12-a4be-3723-e52a-56a60722a75f@gmx.de> <a3805f67-620b-67f0-9c06-c865b71029e7@codalogic.com> <bb1ef6a8-506c-344b-b903-980ed50ad2d3@gmx.de> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> <ac1d1b68-67e7-c19f-a556-280df73f465b@outer-planes.net>
To: "Matthew A. Miller" <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/NGneLCmYdhMoM5cWlsKtrdBTv8s>
Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding"
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 10 May 2017 17:42:55 -0000

> On May 10, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Matthew A. Miller <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net> wrote:
> 
> """
> 8.1.  Character Encoding
> 
> When transmitting over a network protocol, JSON text MUST be
> encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]).
> 
> Previous specifications of JSON have not required the use of UTF-8
> when transmitting JSON text. However, the vast majority of
> JSON-based software implementations have chosen to use the UTF-8
> encoding, to the extent that it is the only encoding that achieves
> interoperability.
> 
> Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark (U+FEFF) to the
> beginning of a JSON text.  

Suggestion: change "JSON text" here to "network-transmitted JSON text"
Rationale: it's not clear that this restriction applies to the JSON described up 2 paragraphs.

> In the interests of interoperability,
> implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a
> byte order mark rather than treating it as an error.
> """
> 
> If you find this acceptable, please indicate that.  Otherwise, please
> provide suggested changes.

Other than my nit, +1

— 
Joe Hildebrand