Re: [Json] Some thoughts on the "text model" discussion

OK, since general discussion has not broken out, let’s be very specific in
answer to Pete’s question:

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>wrote;wrote:

> For each of these three items, I think if we end up with some explanatory
> text in the documents that helps make the appropriate distinctions (and
> note that I am being purposely agnostic on what the WG should say about
> each of them), I think that would help the clarity and implementability of
> the spec.
>

I propose this as the explanatory text for the -bis:

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
A JSON text which is composed entirely of Unicode characters (however
encoded) will be interoperable in the sense that all Unicode-capable
software which parses it will agree on the contents of names and values of
object members.  However, the ABNF in this specification allows member
names and string values to contain bit sequences which cannot encode
Unicode characters, for example "\udddd" (an unpaired UTF-16 surrogate).
Instances of this have been observed, for example when a library truncates
a UTF-16 string to a maximum allowable length without checking whether the
truncation split a surrogate pair.  The behavior of software which receives
JSON texts containing such values is unpredictable; for example, two
different implementations might return different values for the length of a
string value, or even suffer a fatal runtime exception.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

That’s all. Point out the problem as exactly and clearly as possible, then
shut up.

>
> I'll leave it to the chairs to decide where to take the discussion from
> here.
>
> pr
>
> --
> Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.**com/~presnick/<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
> >
> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/json<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>
>