Re: [Json] Kicking Off JSONbis

Thanks, Carsten. My belief is that ECMA404 meet neither of those criteria.

I also believe, based on prior conversation, that the goal of this WG has
nothing to do with with changing the meaning of RFC7159, but rather is
aimed at “standards harmonization”. While I’m unconvinced of the benefits,
if there’s IETF consensus behind such harmonization, I wouldn’t stand in
the way.  But I would hope that there’s a better way to achieve it than
with a flagrantly bogus normative reference.  And I’ve suggested a couple.

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

> Rob Sayre wrote:
> >>  “Normative Reference” has a very specific meaning, and that meaning
> > clearly does not apply in this case.
> >
> > That conclusion is not clear to me. Can you explain?
>
> I'll leave explaining the conclusion to Tim, but here is the premise:
>
> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/normative-informative.html
>
> In particular: "Normative references specify documents that must be read
> to understand or implement the technology in the new RFC, or whose
> technology must be present for the technology in the new RFC to work."
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>

-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)