Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus to Adopt I-JSON as a WG Item in the Charter

[Tony Hansen <[e-mail]>]

On 3/15/14, 9:46 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Matt Miller wrote:
>> The chairs are seeking comment on whether we should adopt I-JSON
>> (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bray-i-json-01) as a WG item in our
>> charter. Remember that adopting this draft does not mean it is done;
>> changes can happen based on the consensus of the WG.
> No, not without changing the nature of the document considerably. These
> are just best practises and not a separate format with its own name.

Based on the conversation that we had at the WG session in London, I 
came away convinced that:

     *) it does need to be a WG item
     *) we need neither a new media type nor a mandatory internal-tag 
indicating compliance with i-json, so that stuff needs to be removed 
from the document
     *) an optional internal-tag might need some more discussion
     *) the document should really just reflect a set of restrictions on 
the json format that can be (optionally?) validated against

- Tony Hansen