Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward

Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Thu, 20 February 2014 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <cyrus@daboo.name>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03341A0636 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 18:06:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
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 wF5SFvWUyIEY for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 18:05:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C785D1A063A for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 18:05:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB8E5D3D27A; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 21:05:51 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com
Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vWvA98MU4ril; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 21:05:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [10.0.1.22] (unknown [173.13.55.49]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7EF75D3D26F; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 21:05:49 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 21:05:47 -0500
From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
To: Pete Cordell <petejson@codalogic.com>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <B1EBE05A69362F001777F807@cyrus.local>
In-Reply-To: <357740A8AA0F4316BE630917321FAB4D@codalogic>
References: <C87F9B96-E028-4F0E-A950-B39D3F68FFE7@vpnc.org> <CAMm+LwhUh_yN-hzaoDWfrO_H2iGvYvj99BCE4EcYmgqCPqXoVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6itpttXBfVQGKw=u==k_XSdrht81+m_YDNZP6RM+=9CNow@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOjHkBFOzJSx=bhhoQJ8Z2bWyEXK52dNyYGWVb9FAj99ow@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6itzQ0rzU3EUYUqzm2qhx03qk1mpx2sehS_zeiw1ypcEgw@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOhfjkbq6eREkt=MBVL1C9ubh-6My3Lvg-mnOxD0+cpN1Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6isZbew8O1HJ+XcFsMCR42iDoO_uemPXVwa3=vM5A=MngA@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOgmVsNJqrqCfsD7h37axssOoaX3DGHqO=bTn5bWrA+MFA@mail.gmail.com> <A4B53816-6FBF-4A37-8BC9-F0A9D0867BCD@tzi.org> <357740A8AA0F4316BE630917321FAB4D@codalogic>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0b1 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; size=1091
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/QJ9h_kCA-c1xYSZ2gahZgLHyi3o
Subject: Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 02:06:04 -0000

Hi Pete,

--On February 19, 2014 at 10:29:32 PM +0000 Pete Cordell 
<petejson@codalogic.com> wrote:

> I thought I'd throw down n gauntlet as a baseline for something to be
> beat. So I started with something C like, and stole stuff from other
> languages and came up with the following
>

Please take a look at Andrew Newton's spec 
(<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-newton-json-content-rules/>).

I have used that in two specs of my own:

<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-douglass-timezone-service-10#section-7>
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-daboo-aggregated-service-discovery-03.txt> 
Appendix B

I found it to be easy to use and provide the necessary "commentary" for the 
JSON format chosen for those specs. I know several others who have 
implemented the timezone service protocol and we had no issues with 
interoperability related to the JSON format (beyond some poor text 
descriptions on my part).

As Andrew noted earlier, his spec could probably be simplified some more - 
but we certainly don't need anything more complicated than what is there 
now.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo