Re: [Json] I-D Action: draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-04.txt

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 21 July 2017 16:08 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 983CA128BC8 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 mLKye7Z8QLnc for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB011126C0F for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6LG7xji016826; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 18:07:59 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from client-0176.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0176.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3xDbJt59gdz3ZVp; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 18:07:58 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <166957c4-26fc-90b5-a798-59280c91b466@filament.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 18:07:57 +0200
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, json@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 522346077.124164-9aa41f07bd4c895c79374f31799b8102
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8B60039F-96DD-4F72-8139-D80B6F11566C@tzi.org>
References: <150047191184.7507.7143481683564082881@ietfa.amsl.com> <DB9BA7EA-D393-4079-B347-620A09280B26@isode.com> <CAC4RtVBYMrRCrUZ1qqD+_rH4M8N23GOgbbh=921fEYqH+gCm5Q@mail.gmail.com> <c06e583a-965e-9eaf-975f-e6876ac056ed@filament.com> <f1a6b553-c787-e248-67bd-74d68d98a845@gmx.de> <262E8314-263A-4443-B912-AFCF1A3277B2@tzi.org> <166957c4-26fc-90b5-a798-59280c91b466@filament.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - Filament <peter@filament.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/n5Wc1aQzuldPH94WbtYcfb1TQis>
Subject: Re: [Json] I-D Action: draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-04.txt
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 21 Jul 2017 16:08:06 -0000

On Jul 21, 2017, at 17:35, Peter Saint-Andre - Filament <peter@filament.com> wrote:
> 
> Improvements over my suggested text are welcome. Or do you think that
> the text in -04 is good enough? I find it somewhat ambiguous.

Hi Peter,

>>> When an entity transmits JSON text over a network,
>>> e.g. as the payload of an application protocol, it MUST encode
>>> that text using UTF-8 [RFC3629].

… seems close enough for me.

It clearly has a nitpicking opportunity, but other attempts to improve the original text so far have made it worse.
I was mainly trying to point out that the mere fact that one can willfully pretend to misunderstand this (or the previous) text does not mean that it actually is ambiguous to a cooperating reader — the previous version is just a bit hard to read (and shouts out that we had trouble wordsmithing it).  I was then trying to point out what the essence of the statement is: The term JSON when used in a context that implies interchange (as opposed to representing the concept of JSON within a program or single system) also includes its encoding in UTF-8.  But I’m not trying to wordsmith here, I’ll leave that to the native speakers.

Grüße, Carsten