Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8259 (7673)

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

 Oh, and as I didn’t say, while the erratum is reasonable, I think it’s a
reject.

On Oct 11, 2023 at 8:14:24 AM, Tim Bray <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Well, this is a strange one.  All the specs for JSON have said the same
> thing, and the thing they’ve said is kind of stupid. The requested change
> is to add U+7F DEL to the list of characters that MUST be escaped.
>
> However, I created a document containing one field containing only a
> single U+7F, it is available at https://www.tbray.org/tmp/del.json, and
> it seems to be legal JSON.  So, in fact, while DEL should have been
> included in the must-escapes, the world’s software has learned to live with
> it not being escaped.
>
> Note that this file does not display correctly.
>
>  ~ % curl https://www.tbray.org/tmp/del.json | jsonlint
>   % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time     Time
>  Current
>                                  Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left
>  Speed
> 100    23  100    23    0     0    224      0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:--
> 237
> {
>   "example": ""
> }
>
> FWIW, those who care about such issues may be interested in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bray-unichars/ currently under
> discussion in the art@ and i18ndir@ mailing lists.
>
>
> On Oct 11, 2023 at 7:17:00 AM, Joe Hildebrand <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Suggested resolution: reject
>>
>> RFC 8259's ABNF is quite clear that these codepoints are allowed:
>> "unescaped = %x20-21 / %x23-5B / %x5D-10FFFF"
>>
>> ECMA-404 agrees: "the control characters U+0000 to U+001F".
>>
>> json.org's wording is awkward, but still clear: "any of the Unicode code
>> points except the 32 control codes and "double quote"
>>
>> Here is some JS to prove it got implemented this way:
>>
>> ```
>> JSON.parse('"\x7f"')
>> ```
>>
>> The approach in the errata might have been the correct one to have been
>> specified, but it wasn't.  Even if we had wanted to make this change, it
>> was far too late by the time RFC 4627 was written.
>>
>> —
>> Joe Hildebrand
>>
>> On Oct 11, 2023, at 12:56 AM, RFC Errata System <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8259,
>>
>> "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format".
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> You may review the report below and at:
>>
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7673
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> Type: Technical
>>
>> Reported by: Zachary Collier (Zamicol) <[e-mail]>
>>
>>
>> Section: 7
>>
>>
>> Original Text
>>
>> -------------
>>
>> The representation of strings is similar to conventions used in the C
>> family
>>
>> of programming languages.  A string begins and ends with quotation marks.
>> All
>>
>> Unicode characters may be placed within the quotation marks, except for
>> the
>>
>> characters that MUST be escaped: quotation mark, reverse solidus, and the
>>
>> control characters (U+0000 through U+001F).
>>
>>
>> Corrected Text
>>
>> --------------
>>
>> The representation of strings is similar to conventions used in the C
>> family
>>
>> of programming languages.  A string begins and ends with quotation
>> marks.  All
>>
>> Unicode characters may be placed within the quotation marks, except for
>> the
>>
>> characters that MUST be escaped: quotation mark, reverse solidus, and the
>>
>> control characters (U+0000 through U+001F, U+007F, and U+0080 through
>>
>> U+009F).
>>
>>
>>
>> Notes
>>
>> -----
>>
>> There are 33 7-bit control characters, but the JSON RFC only listed 32 by
>>
>> omitting the inclusion of the last control character in the 7-bit ASCII
>> range,
>>
>> 'del.'  However, JSON is not limited to 7-bit ASCII; it is Unicode.
>> Unicode
>>
>> encompasses 65 control characters from U+0080 to U+009F, totaling an
>> additional
>>
>> 32 characters.  The section that currently reads "U+0000 through U+001F"
>> should
>>
>> include these additional control characters reading as "U+0000 through
>> U+001F,
>>
>> U+007F, and U+0080 through U+009F"
>>
>>
>> Instructions:
>>
>> -------------
>>
>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
>>
>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>>
>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
>>
>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> RFC8259 (draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-04)
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> Title               : The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
>> Interchange Format
>>
>> Publication Date    : December 2017
>>
>> Author(s)           : T. Bray, Ed.
>>
>> Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
>>
>> Source              : Javascript Object Notation Update
>>
>> Area                : Applications and Real-Time
>>
>> Stream              : IETF
>>
>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> json mailing list
>>
>> [e-mail]
>>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>
>>
>>