[Json] Counterproposal on work items

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Wed, 20 February 2013 17:27 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 A2B8421F8686 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.220, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vaz7yyCtegik for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com [209.85.220.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0266D21F85D7 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id fa10so4215345pad.41 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:x-originating-ip:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=pMvv/9TN/PO7fRQrzugsVTy2s0BLhvG/BYT2LCWNItY=; b=Y0/5wzURPAW4X0VoQbq+LzPZPSKv5LgDdzPklv476Rm7265HN2l/uUOhLBtMZCeZdw jsKQLv7aDbr9f55DeAKk4MIaQ4W9YUE5MmQ7EyLMUphndtV9ohnT3AiuKrSmQ1f3E3Kq WgMWC1hkjt6CkIPrrpRxS8CV3hFKaZnO9MAX3tsl1GvblDXZvGEIonh53k5H+nRnLaq1 L7fyMXm0g3Ha04cusarMWP+OrTamxDR9J7XkfKUVdinXcNBqr3qAxWyvfGPVvS04zhPB ANXpz+lGvLpFncwltqq0O+vcwjF4rhNjGDLQFD0051yYx5iFto+z3OjSS52BqoodmSHv CFTw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.86.201 with SMTP id r9mr55011866paz.14.1361381232695; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.66.249.129 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32]
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:27:12 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHBU6ityBeA+M-PEme09gO_jVySr33-X308i1UttxrQwSgYmGQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042fd918c758ab04d62b44b9
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlyKeWty2uoU4SHwWoBlT92qZjNS+kWKcXkzODE1Pv16GCTq246envxuyHsDi4LIZgozb+e
Subject: [Json] Counterproposal on work items
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." <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, 20 Feb 2013 17:27:13 -0000

My proposal is: do nothing.

I use JSON for protocol design and work all the time, and have not observed
any interop problems in the wild which originate at the JSON parson or
construction level.  I give the incoming text to the library and it Just
Works or reliably reports a syntax botch.  I give my data structures to the
JSON serializer and cheerfully send off whatever comes out. I read specs
and build clients and servers and, when things break, it’s because I’m
stupidly using a bogus name or value in some field, not because of the
serialization.

I suggest that there is not a problem here that needs the investment of
precious IETF time.

 -T