IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the current ECMAScript specification

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Wed, 02 October 2013 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.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 7BDD421F9D96 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 EW1sQDS4ks0J for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f176.google.com (mail-lb0-f176.google.com [209.85.217.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 774DF21F9EED for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f176.google.com with SMTP id y6so1085344lbh.7 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=fScTGU5OeW7m/vkvgahGmKnid7jTH/yU1NyGXfXBAh0=; b=YEFlLECN+/Gy0j9346h9JZRy5lgANFKwp6EstpR9RO5e+NwVpYN17vvyKTRu8wm1KT CKEJEtf4eR4Q1bT+MvDqmUkC9ExPKmSk/ID6gVMGjVgcM+60jSErJDpeCjdL3QY8slNc 0PUINEG7i+HuWMM83DC7SG46ho7pPkJDbQFkDGVr2z86YF3V6JPLqO0YDHKME5G+JY+1 fvh79lIMqj5p2ITz31bb07eKSIw18kOxHS+anmxbkFya7jFYhD6a+LYC4+nkI3oZ3Orl H5hnlOlEH3VJ176N9Uv0NLbVqA1MNrBzPWB+MwdKXKj9ZMiPZghVMm5wX+vhbfHTAhIQ arZw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk/pEvUlFyTRAIr2GgRMsMGvIIVsmvqRe9mOJlp6N4FXVH6ZTJVPDNq8wU/T550V0suZTNX
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.115.242 with SMTP id jr18mr2562862lab.40.1380738679441; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:31:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.10.200 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:31:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [172.19.29.195]
In-Reply-To: <msno49dcetlu4jaelpu2jqk68116v27sgu@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411EF1BB0B@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <CAChr6SyznBktmOLpT-EiZ5Nm_0jZ16M0tOo4aZ_jhSDb=HHDqg@mail.gmail.com> <23C96FBA-3419-4C97-A075-462F7443013A@vpnc.org> <CAHBU6is2WzCNCwa0PYMM1Hr3Lij0GxWkVtVUan9=JPbvv0YCZg@mail.gmail.com> <msno49dcetlu4jaelpu2jqk68116v27sgu@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:31:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6itBfoNdfLtjhKhWSbwnFj_rmLzCQb++p160VcbiddNLCg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c3327a841b1004e7c64644"
Cc: JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the current ECMAScript specification
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: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 18:37:03 -0000

So, would it be enough to:
- update the informative reference to point to 5.1
- Have a note that there are differences, with a pointer to section 15.12?

I think 15.12 does a good job of describing them.  The other stuff Rob
mentioned gives details of how javascript implementations have to parse
JSON instances, which I don’t think the -bis needs to care about.


On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:

> * Tim Bray wrote:
> >So, I (blush) confess to never having read ECMA-262, which is what 4627
> >references.  I thought I’d have a glance; I'm assuming that what I want
> is:
> >
> http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST-ARCH/ECMA-262,%203rd%20edition,%20December%201999.pdf
>
> The JSON object was introduced in the 5th edition of the specification,
> while you have the third edition from 1999. The current edition is 5.1,
> http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-15.12 with the JSON
> object in section 15.12 as linked.
> --
> Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
> Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
> 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email