Re: [Json] Radically changing 4627bis

"Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> Thu, 10 October 2013 10:33 UTC

Return-Path: <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
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 8124821E8100 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 03:33:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.738
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.738 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.980, BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96]
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 B8evhsQwUjRu for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 03:33:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41AD511E80E8 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 03:33:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Vostro3500 ([2.34.217.54]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MJBRC-1VVsFk1oPy-002r4A for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:33:46 +0200
From: "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
To: <json@ietf.org>
References: <20131008234810.28645.8207.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAHBU6isT8yv4-xf+cL0-RCdNu6DB=6G97MSaR7Z=F-Fz11BM3w@mail.gmail.com> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E11531C3C187@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <E2C3B3A8-3897-44B4-8C9B-A784F63EED59@vpnc.org> <CAHBU6iv25XbpD8hZP7mQVjZaZ4PyQjmqBEiuQ3td0sJq9Q4=Lw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6iv25XbpD8hZP7mQVjZaZ4PyQjmqBEiuQ3td0sJq9Q4=Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:33:41 +0200
Message-ID: <00c001cec5a4$310c4840$9324d8c0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac7FR8gN4JuOkP6NQvauCDcifAXbZQAXGMMw
Content-Language: de
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:6Bk3rHqBCdOl3fAlYWqHZ4NylmVefZ9Rdaoi4nOBIN/3zuUpayi BMBZ0gSJmQUYhPjNcTHoTcqZwxwMACQPbgKZRIoWwAtnm+g0wf7cxnayQau3dgx+VsPGTwf oitUFNQ31GOJalPqe2dZeUS5wGiC6KAU+xZraaQAosN05OznsN5FxYmkIMINYEZd0oxqwGo a4JrNAaIMhyrlXeG2rwPg==
Subject: Re: [Json] Radically changing 4627bis
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: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:33:53 -0000

On Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:32 AM, Tim Bray wrote:
> The descriptions in ECMA 404 and 4627 and json.org and ECMA 262 and the -bis
> draft are all isomorphic as respects JSON syntax.  Except for the ECMA
> family doesn't impose the top-level array-or-object restriction.  Also 404
> says nothing at all about dupes in objects and loses a few other bits &
> pieces such as default encodings.
> 
> Thus there would be no benefit to a reader of -bis in making them go
> anywhere else to learn the syntax because it’s the same everywhere.  So I
> think the -bis draft helpfully covers the same syntax ground, while also
> offering interoperability-problems advice.  I don’t see any benefit in
> decomposing the -bis at this point.

+1


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler