Re: [Json] Counterproposal #2 on work items

Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> Wed, 20 February 2013 20:39 UTC

Return-Path: <fgaliegue@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 A563121F877B for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:39:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.537
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dsCbbhiRzHvp for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:39:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com (mail-ee0-f54.google.com [74.125.83.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B021521F8754 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:39:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f54.google.com with SMTP id c41so4427692eek.41 for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:39:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ErlULa7EQEwcZz47yGrX9Pt/7jobYhv+/cvVYkYEPrk=; b=mkp5n8Timn/XPmm/8dbbJQlM85f/hV6TJso8QwkDI5pYW3AHE9hDnq6h2SPDGxh16V WgfhCjJFvJpxwxVsfrVF3sPkP0rrdPmVvQE2D0TIX1/2UNm60IKY00fLqISAxBVoVj5M ZCfBkRkfGhIGhq4A38CFN+A8wz0TKE7OjF71YlwDv3fhyMzRW8WFlKkAjG5mO1+T5AIX TXEX7p/pStnzL+JThfcvdAnvGKAN/ysQJT9f69kurd5lSe0dNGKT1TU6Pt+GsZd0UHFO 1EOOy1x9g9OjS3Ltj2UIk7W3dXJ4PXYWqYBaSZNJBdL2ktxphdTz9Uvwqi91VqjdTSQX Tl8w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.14.179.5 with SMTP id g5mr72848250eem.41.1361392776761; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:39:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.1.7 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:39:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F89B751@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
References: <CALcybBC87P7FT7n5d8xmXMxSFU1LBS9eJUsRX4hfYP5CUJr3QA@mail.gmail.com> <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F89B751@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:39:36 +0100
Message-ID: <CALcybBBSL3w1-JRzUVWMmfS+jzytKNOv6omD1cR+_CLjze6WsA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Counterproposal #2 on work items
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." <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: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:39:38 -0000

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
<jhildebr@cisco.com> wrote:
[...]
>
> I would urge not focusing on specific issues for a potential BCP just yet.
>  Let's focus first on the question: "Does it seem useful for us to work on
> this sort of problem?"
>
> Traditionally, we would want the charter to be pretty well-understood at
> the time of the BoF, and this sort of scope definition is our most
> important task this week.
>

That makes sense and it does not seem that important of a question
indeed. It is just that, at least to my eyes, allowing any JSON value
over the wire looks like a no-brainer, but it seems that not everyone
agrees ;)

On the whole, I don't believe it is that important of an issue either.
Duplicate keys in an object, on the other hand, are indeed an
important subject -- again, at least to my eyes.

-- 
Francis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com
Try out your JSON Schemas: http://json-schema-validator.herokuapp.com