IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Last call: JSON charter

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Fri, 29 March 2013 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 471C211E80A3 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.052, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_ADOBE2=2.455, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 44B8bZqTDGv6 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:40:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 935DC21F866F for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:40:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-12.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.12]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r2TMe0QK038494 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:40:01 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D1E885D8AAD@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:40:00 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BDEACF13-A37F-403F-A31D-8C085B9FBCB3@vpnc.org>
References: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F8FD11E@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <B196B7A7-2090-4D53-8920-EB131E2D7E11@vpnc.org> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D1E885D8AAD@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, json@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Json] Last call: JSON charter
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, 29 Mar 2013 22:40:04 -0000

On Mar 29, 2013, at 3:04 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:

> So if TC 39 asks nicely for a minor  change to the document that would
> otherwise prevent  them from using the new RFC as a normative  reference -- 
> even if the change makes no technical change to the specification -- 
> such requests should be rejected because they aren't " minimal change" or 
> correcting errors?

Strawman: wind. Can you give an example of a "minor change" that is not a "minimal change"? It's kind of hard to parse your objection to the proposed charter if you use vague hypotheticals like that. More directly: can you point to specific words in the proposed charter that indicate we would reject input from anyone about correcting errors?

> Anne van Kesteren: 
> "FWIW, XMLHttpRequest references TC39's version of JSON which is completely self-contained and without known errors. Not really sure why the IETF feels there's a need to publish that version independently."

Anne is welcome (and in fact invited!) to read this mailing list for the answer to that.

> at least some of the commenters wanted to make sure there was
> only one JSON standard, not two.

There are currently at least three that have differences: json.org, RFC 4627, and ECMAScript.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email