IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Two Documents

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 13 June 2013 20:56 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 2AD3521F9977 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.18
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.18 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 J4Jt2NHRDXZn for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A730821F9AE6 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r5DKtrjn029535; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:55:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.217.105] (p54893550.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.137.53.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69DA6360E; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:55:53 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6iu1O0Z5sNcqsHhGjeEFYimqV9tvDTbxAYy3KFbvBq480w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:55:52 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6B248CB6-BDD2-4A24-B69D-FB7A29EEF27F@tzi.org>
References: <51B9EA49.2050604@crockford.com> <CAHBU6iu1O0Z5sNcqsHhGjeEFYimqV9tvDTbxAYy3KFbvBq480w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Two Documents
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: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:56:09 -0000

On Jun 13, 2013, at 18:55, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

> So... two documents, yes.  Abstract syntax, no.

+1

The JSON data interchange format has no use if it is floating in the air.
It must have both feet firmly on the ground, in concrete syntax, in bits and bytes.
(And one of the feet can be RFC 3629.)

RFC4627 managed to do this reasonably well, why should it suddenly be hard?

Grüße, Carsten

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status