[Json] JSON files in old-time DOS 8.3 file system, proposed extension "JON".

bnossum@norwia.no Sat, 20 May 2017 07:03 UTC

Return-Path: <bnossum@norwia.no>
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 B928D12943D for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ddcTy4Q5mtMN for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.powertech.no (smtp2.powertech.no [195.159.0.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52DD7128C84 for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from epost.powertech.no (www2.powertech.no [195.159.42.242]) by smtp2.powertech.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id F16AAF81E7 for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:03:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from 80.212.78.253 (SquirrelMail authenticated user norwia.bnossum) by epost.powertech.no with HTTP; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:04:09 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <56979.80.212.78.253.1495263849.squirrel@epost.powertech.no>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 09:04:09 +0200
From: bnossum@norwia.no
To: json@ietf.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/j5ENumcSN04DWk1S4WHXZvcSUdA>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 21 May 2017 07:05:28 -0700
Subject: [Json] JSON files in old-time DOS 8.3 file system, proposed extension "JON".
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 21 May 2017 07:29:17 -0000

Dear IETF,

In the embedded computing community it is common to use the FAT file
system in primitive ways (for space/resource reasons). Hence I need to
obey the old-time 8.3 file names.

In RFC7159 the file extension of a file containing JSON data is specified
to be ".json", obviously one letter to long for my needs.

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file extension ".JON"
for old FAT file systems?  I realize that this problem will eventually go
away, but probably not for a good many years.



Best regards,
Baard Nossum, +47 92409073