Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8259 (6208)

"John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Wed, 10 June 2020 16:03 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 434EB3A08AA for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 09:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com
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 elCDIWenL6U2 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 09:03:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E33FC3A0916 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 09:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 93838 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2020 16:03:00 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=16e83.5ee10434.k2006; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=27XhCf3jlCp80aoDA3A0kU3DmOonOCGK/+k9X2iFXBI=; b=bxouH2PJbaq/4/iFyVTM+5fElYFMePt0yiuOYO1eTv1Gp3bHsXqKtePRQscpLW0V9xoFMbdGyMsWrejTe4lTSOkT3ldvgrAJZn0gmb9NkfoURlX6rYWkMIOk+DrhsfsHSQW5afdmlGXh6OEibkd+hJqjYnSDvn+KrJzEn93+RtLzSkLuCIVe73Zw+GjkMAdSwxUgvRkJdVjWE2lRkrfDn3tMTI3bGxzny4Xyk8F9gUsew9VBHr8GrBJKi2Tlrf2O
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 10 Jun 2020 16:03:00 -0000
Date: 10 Jun 2020 12:03:00 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.22.407.2006101200090.62250@ary.qy>
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: "Carsten Bormann" <cabo@tzi.org>, "RFC Errata System" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: tbray@textuality.com, superuser@gmail.com, barryleiba@computer.org, linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net, xdg@xdg.me, json@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <19B4CC94-8752-46AF-95A2-6BB25E480A24@tzi.org>
References: <20200610133258.D4B85F4073D@rfc-editor.org> <19B4CC94-8752-46AF-95A2-6BB25E480A24@tzi.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (OSX 407 2020-02-09)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1876560340-1591804980=:62250"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/TZhVpjZhvt-LqRUbdU01lE1gnfU>
Subject: Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8259 (6208)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 10 Jun 2020 16:03:24 -0000

> Apart from that, I seriously don’t understand what the "indicate an alternate encoding” would be — the JSON text already is UTF-8?

if it's a UTF-16BE BOM, quite possibly the text is encoded as UTF-16BE. 
But I agree we're deep into "don't do that" territory.

R's,
John

>> On 2020-06-10, at 15:32, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>>
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8259,
>> "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format".
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6208
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Technical
>> Reported by: David Golden <xdg@xdg.me>
>>
>> Section: 8.1
>>
>> Original Text
>> ——————
>> In the interests of interoperability, implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a byte order mark rather than treating it as an error.
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> In the interests of interoperability, implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a byte order mark or MAY interpret a byte order mark to indicate an alternate encoding rather than treating it as an error.
>>
>> Notes
>> -----
>> The original line is copied from previous RFCs that specifically allowed alternate encodings.  In the context of a new, UTF-8 only restriction, interoperability provisions should also address interpreting legacy formats that predate the restriction.  By omission, readers may conclude that the *only* option for a BOM is to ignore or error.
>>
>> Instructions:
>> -------------
>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC8259 (draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-04)
>> --------------------------------------
>> Title               : The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format
>> Publication Date    : December 2017
>> Author(s)           : T. Bray, Ed.
>> Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
>> Source              : Javascript Object Notation Update
>> Area                : Applications and Real-Time
>> Stream              : IETF
>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> json mailing list
>> json@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>
>

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly