Re: [Json] secdir review of draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-03

[Peter Cordell <[e-mail]>]

On 14/03/2017 13:58, John Cowan wrote:
> In my opinion, we should either take all references to UTF-16 or UTF-32
> out, or add back a correct detection algorithm. UTF-8 is what is
> actually interoperable, and interoperability is what RFCs are supposed
> to be all about.

Combining the original (Tim's) & Martin's proposal with my tweak, plus 
John & Carsten's direction, how about:


8.1.  Character Encoding

    JSON text SHOULD be encoded in UTF-8 [UNICODE] (Section 3).  JSON
    texts that are encoded in UTF-8 are interoperable in the sense that
    they will be read successfully by the maximum number of
    implementations.

    There are many implementations that cannot successfully read texts
    in other encodings.  JSON text MAY be encoded in other encodings if
    the generator is sure that the intended parsers can read them.

    Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark to the beginning of a
    JSON text.  In the interests of interoperability, implementations
    that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a byte order mark
    rather than treating it as an error.

Are "generator" and "parser" the correct terms to use in this instance, 
or does that functionality sit above the character encoding layer?

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Rules for Describing JSON Content, http://json-content-rules.org