Re: [Json] Consensus on JSON-text (WAS: JSON: remove gap between Ecma-404 and IETF draft)

[John Cowan <[e-mail]>]

Paul Hoffman scripsit:

> If you believe that ECMA-404 will change in the future, that
> would indicate that ECMA might break interoperability with current
> implementations, even for what they perceive as "good reasons". In
> general, the IETF tries not to have its long-lived standards normatively
> latch on to moving targets for this very reason. Even when other SDOs
> have assured us that they will not make backwards-incompatible changes,
> they have done so anyway (cue the Klensin-esqe theme music...), and
> that has caused serious interoperability problems for the IETF specs.

Binding specifically to the first edition of ECMA-404 would resolve
that problem.  Binding to a specific edition doesn't work so well with
Unicode, but that is because Unicode is a special case: it expands its
coverage in successive editions to ever-larger portions of the world
of writing systems.  It would have been impossible to do the whole
thing at once, unlike even the largest ordinary technical standard.
ECMA-404 is not in that league.

-- 
Not to perambulate                 John Cowan <[e-mail]>
    the corridors                  http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
during the hours of repose
    in the boots of ascension.       --Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel