Re: [Json] Comments on proposed charter for JSON

"Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com> Fri, 01 March 2013 18:06 UTC

Return-Path: <jhildebr@cisco.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 275A221E8037 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 10:06:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.581
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.581 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uC7nIqGYzL8I for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 10:06:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589A221E8091 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 10:06:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1201; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1362161197; x=1363370797; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=T54dI5CTPa9Rr/D0Gook4KcTivGY9eZqZn779r6pdDA=; b=D563cb7ZzE32vgx5Tf1H+htI/ef0sVHJ4YrsLeOFSBT9/eit86ki6rq4 j6o6BcmJq5VwriU5Lp9YReg9VKqzJbrmmc8CJUtm9q1hU2MaX0HgXeN04 CiVsmmrpf/X3gktRskYiqAotkE4jIvQa8dCOPRMJ1pz7PXPGKLfoA0SAS Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAKXtMFGtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABEwjx/FnOCIQEEAQEBNzQLEgEIIhQ3CyUCBAENBQgMh38MwSMEjmwxB4JfYQOnLoMIgic
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,762,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="182743934"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2013 18:06:37 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com [173.37.183.76]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r21I6af3016808 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 1 Mar 2013 18:06:36 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.195]) by xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([173.37.183.76]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 12:06:36 -0600
From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Thread-Topic: [Json] Comments on proposed charter for JSON
Thread-Index: AQHOFoa1mtOhGFIzGkOoTld8oagPt5iRfM4A//+UZQA=
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 18:06:35 +0000
Message-ID: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F8AF2FE@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F511CA8-1FC1-46AF-BC22-C64F2C63C052@vpnc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.1.130117
x-originating-ip: [10.129.24.96]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <5C7A40FDF620204EB09320E0FC28C509@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Comments on proposed charter for JSON
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, 01 Mar 2013 18:06:38 -0000

(individual)
I'm fine with the text as it currently sits.

(chair)
Does the current text give anyone heartburn?  I'll start another thread
mid-next week to make sure.


On 3/1/13 10:31 AM, "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:

>I made two more small changes to the proposed charter; comments are
>welcome.
>
>- Changed the community review sentence to say "There are also a number
>of other JSON-related proposals for Standards Track that would benefit
>from review from both the IETF and the larger JSON-using communities
>created by a working group focused on JSON" to indicate that we would
>benefit from JSON-using developers who are currently not active in the
>IETF.
>
>- Changed the "breaking compatibility" sentence to say "Any changes that
>break compatibility with existing implementations will need to have very
>strong justification and broad support, and will have to be documented in
>the new RFC" to make it clear that the resulting RFC should make any
>changes clear.
>
>--Paul Hoffman
>_______________________________________________
>json mailing list
>json@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>



-- 
Joe Hildebrand