Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON?
John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> Fri, 26 February 2021 14:00 UTC
Return-Path: <cowan@ccil.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 0BF493A0B60 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 06:00:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 HJbf11rs_Anu for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 06:00:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x731.google.com (mail-qk1-x731.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::731]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 635CE3A0B68 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 05:59:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x731.google.com with SMTP id h8so9083037qkk.6 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 05:59:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=66CL6jXGaV3vIA1giLYZ4k7a6dGlZyWrpIyhk5WBROg=; b=ieaZy19iZcqynOkT3z3koVbuiAdRHJmztDXaEgiFarCLHOFd1K6XOEmelhztPdu0Dw BvnXF7TbeQnBBAhlTgGCBsreXlDAK+6I8SXe1Ci+VZBmDIU5EHu0C44a5waQ0oJVzbbo FU474w94VAiv98CtxNpvN0Z1LS93Dq7SqVPofXZBIKUTRP47no/OsVVxIhCVv7U32I0l LNHLWhDQIuN/x1XyRECbiKjmjNp+xMiL+bf2+SQq+N9DrNBhzfrURjAxN9/nHqRwXqEA AvW/0rXCqeQPgoncMDCyIeOwjAdcm4i/188pjRFET6V4Vm/VT1iknLXROGeBC/VBQin8 +1iQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=66CL6jXGaV3vIA1giLYZ4k7a6dGlZyWrpIyhk5WBROg=; b=dpLTogywREpVZjrDLsrRFolg9gv23N4KiTuag4sa7Mq7WVCe9Q4w44q0HR0LddCtXa tqJLEFg+fC//ZHuM41cWlF8xD/Ibpej7PQMDGcTL053yluBSGvoMuoiHO2Mi8Sf/7FD+ Pmv9LBDi3ySKdIt52OS1/TPV4C89P4M01MfFNh2nYMW+vK0L0Gv2dxWb7JfDEZ8NMGvC OAU75D+9eG5NXVhMGnO4pFudu8TNK2WEHTFUZHIUVmmNwRl52LYKrG/VlTz1m/M3/PDy A/rjPzTC9AazOG+TqLdScFMmIeMiLHq/vvjy7MP41qu6O8EXwVON6oqAiTzYwS4pM6Wy Vjgg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5325oFTlpfxmLQYd31ZtaefIKPm/I/jDGEGRl/CLQ33djWmXfxl3 ggou0hdcVi+SxnM16rbQFhkTmrk61y1+wodaoerBQg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxhb1hEulaPmeaZGjv0QTXEdKzux/1buG6DfFZoKdq/V0kYU4Q5Ng+EW8bFZ5NUSxiDahPY7jpE4JMz0Ldg9co=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:4a49:: with SMTP id x70mr2659497qka.118.1614347998322; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 05:59:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <90cddfc3-c320-5ac0-210b-c77636383a6b@codalogic.com> <1c819bc9-283d-e36b-7de2-507553420faa@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1c819bc9-283d-e36b-7de2-507553420faa@gmail.com>
From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 08:59:47 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD2gp_TKzBkK=G6PrSKmLyg=67MmFdszCi7X1LVeoO89r63jQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Cc: Pete Cordell <petejson@codalogic.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fbf61205bc3dae63"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/ZToZXwsmDSFjzr2RIKrtX5-iuwY>
Subject: Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON?
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:00:03 -0000
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 7:49 AM Anders Rundgren < anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote: > If the standard-to-be is supposed to interoperate with browsers and > node.js the only viable option is RFC7493. > > If the standard-to-be also targets the financial market, further > constraints apply since floating point arithmetic is ill-suited for > monetary operations. E.g. a monetary amount of 46.99 should be represented > in JSON as the string "46.99". > RFC 8259 incorporates all of the restrictions of 7493 as interoperability warnings, including the one above. That way it stays compatible with ECMA-404 (which has no such restrictions or warnings) but still steers you away from the dark corners of JSON. John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org The Imperials are decadent, 300 pound free-range chickens (except they have teeth, arms instead of wings, and dinosaurlike tails). --Elyse Grasso
- [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Pete Cordell
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Anders Rundgren
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? John Cowan
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Pete Cordell
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Pete Cordell
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? David Kemp
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? John Cowan
- Re: [Json] JSON or I-JSON? Phillip Hallam-Baker