Re: [Json] Normative reference reasoning and logistics

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

Will do.

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Matt Miller (mamille2) <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> It appears we have rough consensus to include a combination of the
> following text suggested by Tim Bray:
>
>     The reference to ECMA-404 in the previous sentence is normative,
>     not with the usual meaning that implementors need to consult it
>     in order to understand this document, but to emphasize that there
>     are no inconsistencies in the definition of the term “JSON text”
>     in any of its specifications. Note, however, that ECMA-404 allows
>     several practices which this specification recommends avoiding in
>     the interests of maximal interoperability.
>
> With these additional points suggested by Joe Hildebrand:
>
>     - The intent is that the grammar is the same between the two
>       documents, although different descriptions are used.  If there a
>       difference is found between them, ECMA and the IETF will work
>       together to update both documents.
>
>     - If an error is found with either document, the other should be
>       examined to see if it has a similar error, and fixed if possible.
>
>     - If either document is changed in the future, ECMA and the IETF will
>       work together to ensure that the two documents stay aligned through
>       the change.
>
> If there are no objections, then Tim and Joe can finalize the text and
> include it with the next revision to draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis.
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> - JSON Chair
>



-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)