IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Counterproposal on work items

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 20 February 2013 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 DBCBF21F8722 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:44:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.434
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.457, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
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 544z-bSrgtP3 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:44:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbef.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1268721F8716 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:44:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE2F6B008B for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:44:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=yT2OhBhPqtfKMY2zBiyvfGVsYws=; b=RUCBGa5Ue0n o7SlUAscrWHJUpnTdbPtDPO1/KCClV7dokY11lwi8C3oqh4IpIc55AfuJzPZt2tV vfOMpHBuAk3n1QSIxVGnNYAGK81CgwIFiKQ/e3ZiiR2mXXp69IYBwu2KJ/kGIeeS bTX7b9/d8YBe0ll92LGBJbw55EoR4oqs=
Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7FF346B00A1 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id x10so7050761wey.3 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:43:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.87.98 with SMTP id w2mr34778397wiz.30.1361385806311; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:43:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.148.193 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:43:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <0F513426-F26D-48F4-A7A8-88F3D3DA881B@vpnc.org>
References: <CAHBU6ityBeA+M-PEme09gO_jVySr33-X308i1UttxrQwSgYmGQ@mail.gmail.com> <0F513426-F26D-48F4-A7A8-88F3D3DA881B@vpnc.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:43:25 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjFCnR8k1csVOkSKTDpA8exDvYdAijn80HKD5zwNzzeSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Counterproposal on work items
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: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:44:26 -0000

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
>> My proposal is: do nothing.
>
> -1.
>
> There are places where RFC 4627 has SHOULDs where some processors do one thing and others do something different. That should be cleaned up in a standards-track RFC, and it should be done with lots of JSON developers and users having a discussion that comes to rough consensus.

One I-D as simple as this hardly justifies a WG.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email