Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6861)
Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Fri, 25 February 2022 05:14 UTC
Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.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 725283A11E8 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 21:14:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
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 YyNnKgoEeK7P for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 21:14:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x134.google.com (mail-lf1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 824C23A11E7 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 21:14:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x134.google.com with SMTP id y24so7534092lfg.1 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 21:14:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=j0o1kGssxKW1gBWSjlILC8jyurcNUu1BVFolKzBRlYY=; b=2bcDz1nucNlqQf0xtwFZNI1lWte+zEqAmaguIcbd1I7Xh0pvZFlPZv2C/QgmKaS6Ht v6mO2CCr2Js/Ok+/wVHtqSY+RCKOVGSKHytSczTEFZQo2e9r7UgPD1ND7LhVbDCghIZ8 qf5xrJ89CWy7gA9lKZ4YJK4hR6DrZzHs4eI38DnDGHLC/c1mwaFQyFH+y1Lp3obzoEfr gpjvCmgK6QD0ysiC1jPwRBJiv3PWzYQdjMZR04reREgnwMqGqAqNSBN1uctMUkSIPV+U Cw/gfcXj13hKGT7aXlKuvnSC0xHW3hWZImVRicQqpGjyJOIA2vnbjosLMu0Qd2KK3TnW DK5w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=j0o1kGssxKW1gBWSjlILC8jyurcNUu1BVFolKzBRlYY=; b=0JUiKfKCI4x6mUIbCGLMe60PcUZGCq8mdqeJ3/B6mbW1JhO/NG5YvZ+zu6NTNjGQ+D x6wbp79hLadFJNKmuvb4g0MrsNEciZTiLQkCVYqAlYwk4+A+nh3xhlT/fdhfP9Gwf30R cnbgJNvsBo6v7GVlzzYH55qcFtwTuhnfH1RI7Gpn2ovufULXavupCEkqpXN1CpJDqZlJ +EXUruP9CwtUQYuPiSv9O+VWVq/uiu9qPG+ABQ7WCIqZs+DVWg+cOudkcfsOC0BjR/a/ H9eIryunvlS90gwPkwvdbftdt3+DCqoeyoJhZ8cAdF9U9idg++JLZarbMprJMphtp0W1 Njkw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5324P/zKNRowngEadsV9oTb4kATJ+8YZJksmacyX36T2FRdtoYbN Nn+z0YoZ2iC4Yv0LmI0CnZiltXs1ndInnI1rigDasg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwmPjcA7xJQBIXifSTaASL/v//zPt4104kvr6ECzbrR4GabspJIG3Lvr3BkP9KMijNbH3w6g00ipH3k65zykzo=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:46c9:0:b0:43b:b45d:56de with SMTP id p9-20020ac246c9000000b0043bb45d56demr3868383lfo.338.1645766050832; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 21:14:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220225033322.ECC44289E1@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220225033322.ECC44289E1@rfc-editor.org>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 21:13:59 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHBU6iu7AdA8FQyCSOE5=-5wZJ590b0sYxmazFiTebDQUdUN9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, rfc7493-errata@chrismorgan.info, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d7fee505d8d0c412"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/kdd3EGROTDBZjeVKpbgf-vZiFw0>
Subject: Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6861)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 05:14:19 -0000
I'm inclined to accept this one, can't disagree with the argument. On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 7:33 PM RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7493, > "The I-JSON Message Format". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6861 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Chris Morgan <rfc7493-errata@chrismorgan.info> > > Section: 2.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > Object member names, and string values in arrays and object members, > MUST NOT include code points that identify Surrogates or > Noncharacters as defined by [UNICODE]. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > Object member names, and string values, > MUST NOT include code points that identify Surrogates or > Noncharacters as defined by [UNICODE]. > > Notes > ----- > The expression “string values in arrays and object members” is overly > qualified, excluding cases where the *entire message* is a string value, > which should clearly be covered also. So the qualification “in arrays and > object members” should be removed. > > Supporting citations: > > RFC 7493, section 2: “An I-JSON message is a JSON text, as defined by RFC > 7159.” > > RFC 7159, section 2: “A JSON text is a serialized value. Note that > certain previous specifications of JSON constrained a JSON text to be an > object or an array. […]” > > RFC 7159, section 2: > > JSON-text = ws value ws > > RFC 7159, section 3: > > value = false / null / true / object / array / number / string > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC7493 (draft-ietf-json-i-json-06) > -------------------------------------- > Title : The I-JSON Message Format > Publication Date : March 2015 > Author(s) : T. Bray, Ed. > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : JavaScript Object Notation > Area : Applications > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG >
- [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6861) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Chris Morgan
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… John Levine
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Rob Sayre
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Rob Sayre
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7493 (6… Tim Bray