IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Update reference for ABNF

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Thu, 06 June 2013 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 A016321F941F for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.712
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.712 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.887, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 5xhW2ixLa3jD for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB1C21F90EF for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-0-66-165.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.0.66.165]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r56FW38s029887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 6 Jun 2013 08:32:04 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <51B06A44.1070008@crockford.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 08:32:03 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2E0B8DF9-BF9F-485E-B011-D9864C4DB875@vpnc.org>
References: <51AF9D4C.5060403@crockford.com> <60563185-85A8-4696-8B8C-9282256CFA71@vpnc.org> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1151B10582A@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <19943667-1EC6-427F-9122-EC037BDE47F1@vpnc.org> <51AFEC73.1030904@crockford.com> <2484862A-4DFF-44D7-9D9D-7E44520C5BED@vpnc.org> <51B06A44.1070008@crockford.com>
To: Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: json@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Json] Update reference for ABNF
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, 06 Jun 2013 15:32:09 -0000

On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:53 AM, Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com> wrote:

> On 6/5/2013 7:00 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On Jun 5, 2013, at 6:57 PM, Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 6/5/2013 6:22 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>> On Jun 5, 2013, at 5:32 PM, "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> P.S. Another little fix: update reference to ABNF from RFC4234 to RFC5234.
>>>> Sounds good to me, as long as a few people promise to do a careful checking of that.
>>>> 
>>>> --Paul Hoffman
>>> Why does this matter? Does RFC5234 offer us any better precision?
>> No, but in the IETF, when one RFC is updated by another, there is an expectation that a new RFC will always refer to the latter.
>> 
>> --Paul Hoffman
> Who will assure that no problems will be introduce if we do this?

Many people on the mailing list, hopefully.

Will one or more of you who care about good ABNF volunteer to do careful checks against RFC 5234?

--Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email