Re: [Json] Limitations on number size?

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 05 June 2013 17:53 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 24D8221F9B32 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
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 Nyl5skQBEaAX for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hapkido.dreamhost.com (hapkido.dreamhost.com [66.33.216.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BA921F9B82 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccah.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.207]) by hapkido.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8798738518 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-f178.google.com (mail-we0-f178.google.com [74.125.82.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5913F3180A3 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u53so1481840wes.37 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=bvYXLEHF4JbufwGYRGai8msnaJrCCQ2FLO+cN0NISNA=; b=p2mi0uQyduhznLmZCn4GPmrfpyWJudsdKKe/6r7JFGRu6kqAPDC6iuKhZcNsWVAkRt lK29M+cHwxfXaMQu7xJmOrY4ZTMeOPycTVl4xmHIZQnooYqfar5XnfL/1Uz5Gv8AI5nA USiElhfj7CFDjlwT46JGZlxlgu/vi2b1iyk3tUTFfwIl/LoiDGseo6DwoWp3lQpvYRj6 /+WqdVZn/Y2b5cu/4fVJoROk91l4aELtBkK/wBZeLgDgZ5goU7u8lTeumkO54mNhRy/T ar5Cvuaej14zBcZv6siuRKJfLzm8mt5jxDt7OHmJrCz/BjKoeXeMuyZS4WS9yY8n+aXl MHow==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.185.244 with SMTP id ff20mr7564599wic.0.1370449204121; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.63.136 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <0E0BC725-03F6-429C-9309-CB315C3AC1AF@tzi.org>
References: <CAK3OfOgPGi4PKxKAGEG=PCv-xaszMqWpUUUH2B9f0UaeMMO1gQ@mail.gmail.com> <C42654A3-E218-45A8-B368-4A60CB89619D@vpnc.org> <C4D8E604-E4F8-408B-B7DD-97226300C212@tzi.org> <CAK3OfOjDp=S=HZ5LTP3L+rqq1VjhSShakmBOJD9aPiN8fSULKw@mail.gmail.com> <C30B2D0D-75A7-49A5-A190-5AD5DC1FCDCC@vpnc.org> <3B8F8F96-F7B6-4734-9553-087A993482A4@tzi.org> <CAHBU6ivXhPjpcqmg3f46b4uuRnQyDigfwKtK+CUbX9Lgp6qZWA@mail.gmail.com> <0E0BC725-03F6-429C-9309-CB315C3AC1AF@tzi.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 11:20:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOj2O1cx+yhNEPHf8Jy5YEs9uWG0cOUsNeEV-WydOQCC7g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, json@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Json] Limitations on number size?
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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, 05 Jun 2013 17:53:53 -0000

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> On Jun 5, 2013, at 18:05, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
>
>> Superfluous. The spec is perfectly clear on number representations.
>
> This text is about number representations only on the surface (and that part can be dialed down).
>
> It may be completely superfluous to you and me, but I have run into enough people who simply don't know what is being said there and make the wrong conclusions.

The only thing RFC4627 says about this is that "[a]n implementation
may set limits on the range of numbers."  That is very clear, on the
one hand, but it's been missed (as I described earlier, where an
implementor told a contributor that JSON supports only IEEE 754 64-bit
numbers).  It's easy to miss because anyone who knows JavaScript knows
JSON, right?  So a section with a provocative title calling out
differences between JS and JSON would probably help at least those who
would read the RFC.