IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Consensus on JSON-text (WAS: JSON: remove gap between Ecma-404 and IETF draft)

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Thu, 28 November 2013 04:55 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1775F1AE0B4; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:55:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 jaVLHgh18Vny; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:55:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lb0-x232.google.com (mail-lb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB741ACCE8; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lb0-f178.google.com with SMTP id c11so6005183lbj.9 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:55:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=UqjisRkEsWKx2nDr+7C6lR9Tn5zdzD9t9y1zv2YOR9o=; b=KQQ4pN7WRfkwbxdsedg9S/crZsU9zHqvuRX80xH2XPoiMfmPfP0wt65brJes6wXzmh 1W3sHoh1GGzYRS6A8DLgdkRgdlofNHAwzXQf6Q66xhpOJZMd59erd9VDTLDlgs+W/Kpo Zq/OoB6WXFZ7/Gel5a6GPar4EXxMGPYEKWTOLOfeh3r/07If2S5c4wIZq9imk1NWERXr wwO9nzpQdXNjaoXSFjTnXyLCgHZDH6UKKN63jAtF3lnpqebJqpA/d4gMoVhHkitBx4dD WPkOFR1wHMWV5xGLoFxOJYBEK++95TFZILZMzGgGn6vpCoCrBtJ5JhUjYmYOTvyzdvt+ R04w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.151.42 with SMTP id un10mr30335463lbb.7.1385614501437; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:55:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.37.172 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:55:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6it-yHeHVY+3EFvPd0pVu4uLLdH3Gmz53LL4DZWJSyyUuQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADnb78h8AjPcQLOCwNm0Pt3pObh6uFV5+zy0c_YU6B-u4MtY1Q@mail.gmail.com> <AA45B3C6-1DC5-4B1E-8045-C9FE76022584@vpnc.org> <C93F89AD-81D2-4489-ADC4-AB05A5B10883@cisco.com> <CAHBU6itgE9=WP+c0oXt1W647b1zz+N6+4ZqRa63Ve91TUsGzTA@mail.gmail.com> <CANr5HFVhG5SNhW4yJxDicvFman94FaNi8UZHhcpQbH6AG6pfQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6it-yHeHVY+3EFvPd0pVu4uLLdH3Gmz53LL4DZWJSyyUuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:55:01 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwgtJ44dPvCCDrGVvUyTg62hnQUFzbrfRVgQ_AeHR5+aQg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b3435b627670104ec3584ce"
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Consensus on JSON-text (WAS: JSON: remove gap between Ecma-404 and IETF draft)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 28 Nov 2013 04:55:05 -0000

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

> I listed some arguments against this in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Oct/0041.html and at the
> moment I still believe them. Is there new information?
>
> On top of that, I have no fear of anyone trying to change JSON in the
> future; they would be resoundingly ignored by the community of
> implementers.  I speak as one who would love to add built-in date/time
> literals but know that it won’t happen.  -T
>

The JavaScript variant may stay the same but people will add features if
they find they are necessary to meet their requirements.

As was previously established, many implementations already support a list
of values so as to enable use in append only logs. I have added length
encoded blocks so as to avoid repeatedly base64 encoding binary blobs.


The Javascript world can ignore me, I try my best to ignore the javascript
world. But if people are implementing one of my protocols they will find
that while it will work perfectly OK with JSON, implementations will be
more efficient if they support JSON-A or JSON-B.

Suggesting that people will never change a spec is silly. Of course specs
will be changed.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email