IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] The text in draft-ietf-json-text-sequence

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 15 July 2014 06:32 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 014A61B2820 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 23:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.366
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.366 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=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 SQYMXo-GCyWM for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 23:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48C791A0309 for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 23:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C034B805B; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 23:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=gy0HN9gC+PjvaMdHdyANDnFIyQ0=; b=L5EU0uog1Zq 8RR0aiKmiD7K+CPZ8aWFir8LsJ92gjk7mbkOBfBaN28zOmQaRDxIfI37B5tJjf9X YPpxTBfqOZ6Qqmf+cQSxdzObjA3Y8Fc01jt+PxhTUTLKeayh61vkxvjStDcXPK8H Qf/shTZLSnCckCOCw4/0m0s5+swUURr8=
Received: from localhost (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C85B0B8058; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 23:32:36 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:32:36 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <20140715063234.GC2256@localhost>
References: <FD9026FF-BDC5-451C-ABBC-0608AB63B819@vpnc.org> <53BB44CB.5040503@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53BB44CB.5040503@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/l4Ya8pCiTC6XYo1rdebXdp5yQCk
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] The text in draft-ietf-json-text-sequence
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 15 Jul 2014 06:32:38 -0000

On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 10:09:31AM +0900, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
> On 2014/07/08 05:57, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> >- Do you feel that the protocol will be significantly broken if it uses LF as the text separator?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >- Do you feel that the protocol will be significantly broken if it uses RS as the text separator?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >- Do you feel that using LF or RF as the text separator is essentially the same for the protocol?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> [...]
> 
> [The above are just a reflection of the fact that I think that this
> format (it's not really a protocol) is unnecessary and therefore
> broken from the start, and therefore it's broken with whatever
> separator there is (except with ',', i.e. simply as a JSON array).
> The problem of diverging opinions is best solved by abandoning this
> spec.]

Do you feel that the IESG ought to request that the RFC-Editor do not
publish if we pursue Informational RFC publication?  Please explain in
detail how this protocol is harmful the Internet.

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email