IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Minimal edit proposal, second round

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Wed, 26 June 2013 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 B7E3D21F9EC2 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 FQjJkVb+a4aY for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82AB021F964C for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ergon.local (unknown [128.107.239.234]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73C52412F9; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 12:57:42 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <51CB398F.8070603@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 12:57:19 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
References: <6E1C1EF7-3971-4FD4-8BCE-349ED5B0B598@vpnc.org> <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70FC6BB9A@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <CAHBU6iuYsKBpHScB_D1QnNE5o8tYMTbGTA9d9hm5chq0+Ec39g@mail.gmail.com> <20130626182305.GA3742@mercury.ccil.org> <949037D0-B1EC-4114-BA9A-5A820119872B@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <949037D0-B1EC-4114-BA9A-5A820119872B@vpnc.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, "json@ietf.org WG" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Minimal edit proposal, second round
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, 26 Jun 2013 18:57:26 -0000

On 6/26/13 12:45 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> <no hat>
> 
> On Jun 26, 2013, at 11:23 AM, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> If we do that, we will have an ambiguous document on the standards
>> track.
> 
> We currently have an ambiguous document *that everyone has used for
> six years* as the de facto standard. No one noticed this ambiguity
> (at least in public) until *after* we started this WG.

And further: the fact that the sky hasn't fallen yet indicates to me
that developers are sensibly following the lead of the tremendous amount
of running code out there, and not getting confused about some edge-case
ambiguities in the formal spec. Rechartering seems like an extreme
reaction here.

Steady on.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email