IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON

Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@gmail.com> Tue, 08 October 2013 20:05 UTC

Return-Path: <tsaloranta@gmail.com>
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 BC91521F9FAB for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.933
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.933 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
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 BYegA5M0fdS5 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x236.google.com (mail-we0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53D121F9E3B for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f182.google.com with SMTP id t61so9236357wes.41 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=7PV67P6+txKASEBPiN50osslm1Mu9xCicKO3srYl9/U=; b=cvy34A6Hn3k2Znqf+RRbJSsD/dHaCQvjrSHl1y3rev0cvUVjAKr1kp71XPO6KLDPsM 58nGMOPgQHZrLffnxEANdboxd6lCo76qdi800r4RUXM85KUt5ltJPQ+I4ljbhvRkGHPY 1PVO4b2H3tyTOY3skIxfPy6CUqndpoAUtf7k0XJbBM0RGKFkOpcovpjAFz4lEy0cTwZN p2TkSMXkuYUacZbAXojYEW4YwceGM/5uvz+xvUvYz/i7PhYXI2LX7lHLK5TNoytrUJgn HY+I3i0qpF9Vso6OSpI2N6MJa+KYn+eOB6UiwQZ8SwCMYyJDYik328GXlBhM2VhhFq2m yuaQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.133.202 with SMTP id pe10mr3420804wjb.46.1381262695881; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.42.9 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <525464AA.8000608@gmail.com>
References: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D3482260661@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <CAHBU6ivjOHyfMeSNPK3+A_4+VVsyH5Y9XDj77J01OZCjdB6wmA@mail.gmail.com> <525429ED.5000705@gmail.com> <04FC3123-33A4-40DA-AD5D-DA543435DE56@wirfs-brock.com> <20131008164219.GA16081@mercury.ccil.org> <52544E3C.7000907@gmail.com> <EC79C919-F229-4467-8781-4B1E1AABD1AC@tzi.org> <525464AA.8000608@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:04:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGrxA27jys1n+xnZPPf_tYAS1u0E5QxU=SRS8VQW90ReuV5AoA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@gmail.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01228d1654617704e84048bc"
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON
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: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:05:09 -0000

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <
pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think that everyone agrees that JSON text is a sequence of Unicode code
> points, but that's not the issue.  The issue is whether JSON strings
> represent sequences of Unicode characters or something else.
>
> The JSON syntax in ECMA-404 appears to allow "\uDEAD" as a string. What
> Unicode character does this represent?
>
> A similar problem infects JSON numbers.  There is no debate as to the
> syntax of JSON numbers.   However, there is very little guidance on what a
> JSON number represents.  Is -0 the same as 0?  Is -0.0 the same as 0?  Is 1.
> **100000000000000000000000000000**00000000000000001 the same as 1.1?  Is
> 1E1 the same as 10?
>
>
I thought that earlier discussions converged towards consensus that only
syntactic equivalence would be defined. If so, none of those would be
considered equivalent at level that this specification operates.
This because binding to native types would be out of scope here.

Equality question could/would be tackled at "best practices" document, or
similar higher-level document.

-+ Tatu +-


> peter
>
>
> On 10/08/2013 12:37 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>
>> On Oct 8, 2013, at 20:26, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <
>> pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  The paragraph on strings, also below, ignores all the problems with
>>> escaped code units that do not represent a Unicode code point.
>>>
>> Actually, no, this point is not ignored at all.
>>
>> It makes it very clear that JSON is composed of Unicode code points.
>> UTF-16 only occurs once, where the twelve-character-escape for non-BMP
>> code points is explained.
>> So that may be one point where following ECMA-404*) might make the work
>> of this WG simpler.
>>
>> Grüße, Carsten
>>
>> *) Great numbering :-)
>> We should try to get RFC 7404 :-)
>>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/json<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email