Re: [Json] Two Documents

Vinny A <jsontest@yahoo.com> Tue, 18 June 2013 03:20 UTC

Return-Path: <jsontest@yahoo.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 A662F21F9B9F for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.47
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.47 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.734, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
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 bSkWlSRHq1cj for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm38-vm6.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm38-vm6.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [98.136.217.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB79C21F9B8E for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:20:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [98.137.12.55] by nm38.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Jun 2013 03:19:56 -0000
Received: from [208.71.42.193] by tm15.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Jun 2013 03:19:56 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp204.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Jun 2013 03:19:56 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1371525596; bh=bz4OK4i6wshlW7W94JxhUxn3jiLSn2VZdQWj9EJb+OY=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:References:In-Reply-To:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:Cc:X-Mailer:From:Subject:Date:To; b=Cu7sOqeYPlTg+aHT5O9KkXgoLU1Ry/bB6hocNebJrf7iJG88xnLmroxCeKrGvJ4rZrzZgepInJ5gkefcnra8FZ3MZNjE4Ee4JDTzSGROBM0Or9+QKUJ2MmlrNHeB4nAnzc8sBgOQA1vHiH5FmPOGSLH88phHrwz0vszLzmeiLt4=
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 371631.23211.bm@smtp204.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: _ZaGbH4VM1mgrum7q5QyL4oe2h9pK8VvPQ21lD4v1PKopST Lzkg3K2Y70TIlQqLcce1PLOSr0mi0RUsoDIyEkuIIn9vmk5dAu2qs2f__dE2 TBjXM1SAQIOvkq0n5QRy.EWQa9QWB0NFZ8Zqj_0lsO9SSdnY00fQzoiaYToK J0ww154cshSs8h0oK6zTX3f1CurG3L_.S22Pa8jZgvORC1.3QjwgdcygYayZ XIj.y08dBj4qjjhMkuB4lbD5xqx7wNLtWHdbQb7_rXalhxdlyhDyhBvqXMI3 amU.rGeh5FrdrrqAWHICnFS95KUgybQfrioGSm.1TzrRsfJAZSZPL0QFS997 2Bw.zVLU_RdOuHiIuY8AYl46FPp1ZA7Mvr.majNGYVjwH.VS9ZQhF1cS2UYO y8VOzi7.WygXWVyGkGv9AGeO_xeGYxxxSpOaqHlzUWpDzk0xzq7viDCo3QGa iuBLVSXjI0zJ3fCNxrP5iC8z_xuwejn4af8VozLrVgevvbhf7sUHVEXVJMsW 4hBP4suYEPlReKf9s3LZKPeiS
X-Yahoo-SMTP: indQcmSswBC8IKsm6t4aCAPskK3T
X-Rocket-Received: from [192.168.0.102] (jsontest@76.29.100.42 with ) by smtp204.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Jun 2013 20:19:56 -0700 PDT
References: <51B9EA49.2050604@crockford.com> <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411528A0E2@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411528A0E2@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5FBB0E3C-E538-48F9-AD32-45AD00151C12@yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: iPod Mail (9B206)
From: Vinny A <jsontest@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:19:52 -0500
To: "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>
Cc: Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Two Documents
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:20:07 -0000

On Jun 17, 2013, at 7:14 PM, "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hello Douglas,
> 
> In order for the WG to fully understand your proposal, we need a more definitive list of what to expect in each document.
> 
> As a starting point, can you describe which sections of the current RFC4627 would be in "JSON Data Interchange Format" and which would be in the JSON best practices document?  Clearly the latter will have many additions from the recent discussions, but it is less clear which portions of the current text goes into which document.


Obviously I'm not Douglas, but I'd like to make a proposal in this department.

The simplicity of the JSON standard has proven to be one of the many reasons why it's so popular. It would be a shame if we ended up bloating the official standard with miscellaneous nitpicks and advice. Clearly the standard needs some touch-up work (duplicate keys, for instance) - but it should be limited to just that, touch up work.

Everything else should be reserved for the best practices document; basically the rule of thumb would be that any new topics should be moved to best practices, while any current topics in the RFC should stay. Here's a short list of potential best practice topic candidates (additions/deletions welcome): 

- Unicode processing
- Runtime/Wire format recommendations
- Streaming parser recommendations
- Additional MIME types
- Comments
- String comparison
- Miscellaneous

-----------------
Vinny
www.jsontest.com