Re: [Json] How to argue about I-JSON

Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com> Mon, 28 April 2014 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <mamille2@cisco.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 B253C1A6FA1 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.152
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.152 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 VGrJgh_JS8UZ for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34011A064C for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3276; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1398714191; x=1399923791; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eO5O4SbesONYp4P0Pwqh2VyIeH/NrNDlFcHs1zhcpus=; b=SeseHvwRcWBHz+pCaQQhRuxrnijR0R6EJfXGgeCrnnOGqyXdvyNmEhho IsaB8vAdAZNuqFaKX0eSHvCi5+bRVk3QHVxZpAO0BkOMzxgS1gvT+Ht0r kiNSfMcNUT+q/Rr5JknnUEA1dInGMLK2IXNfSejdueZs/kY2ebAKDJi9m I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmYFANmuXlOtJA2B/2dsb2JhbABZgwZPV4JlqAcBAQEFkj2HOYEbFnSCJQEBAQQBAQEgDwE7ChELGAICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgEVMAYNBgIBARuIIg2kZqQBF4EphDGIJwQhOoJvgUoEiXGPG5Jeg1CBSkI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,945,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="320988060"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Apr 2014 19:43:10 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com [173.37.183.79]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s3SJhAIb005509 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:43:10 GMT
Received: from MAMILLE2-M-T03K.local (10.129.24.57) by xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (173.37.183.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:43:10 -0500
Message-ID: <535EAF4D.3070508@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 13:43:09 -0600
From: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
References: <CAHBU6iurWB29LujFibWBgcLMsH-n0Jkide_8gAR8fs_FEvoMRA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6iurWB29LujFibWBgcLMsH-n0Jkide_8gAR8fs_FEvoMRA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.129.24.57]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/nq12uuWZryXGdY_hg4-DJguMkJw
Subject: Re: [Json] How to argue about I-JSON
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: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:43:14 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Before the discussions on each topic get too intertwined, the Chairs
would find it more useful to have a separate thread for each of the
topics below.  We ask that you hold off on further comments until the
relevant thread is sent -- which I'm in the process of doing now.


Thanks,

- -- 
- - m&m

Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com >
Cisco Systems, Inc.

On 4/28/14, 12:16 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
> This is an attempt to leap in front of the debate, use the
> take-aways from the very useful London f2f, and make our time
> arguing about I-JSON maximally ​productive .  There are plenty of
> bikesheds out there, but I think the number of useful arguments is
> limited and the issues in them pretty clear.
> 
> Argument 1 - Media types?
> 
> Should there be an I-JSON media type, or a application/*+i-json
> suffix? draft i-json-01 calls for it, but this is at best
> controversial.  My suggestion is that people who still think this
> is a good idea ​need to speak up.  (I won’t.)
> 
> Argument 2 - Top-level
> 
> draft-i-json-01 says the top level is an object (but doesn’t say
> MUST, eek).  I have heard arguments for allowing arrays too​;
> anyone who thinks that is a good idea should speak up. (I won’t.)
> 
> Argument 3 - Unicode
> 
> draft-i-json-01 excludes the use of, and I quote, “Surrogates or 
> Noncharacters”.   Is that the right use of Unicode nomenclature?
> This really matters and I think it’s OK now, but first-class
> Unicode lawyering is required here.
> 
> Argument 4 - Software behavior
> 
> Section 3 of draft-json-01 implies draconian error handling - when
> a message is specified to be i-json but the receiver finds, for
> example, a dupe key, it is required to halt and catch fire. There’s
> a chance that this will be interpreted as “tbray poisons JSON with
> XML draconianism”. People with alternate language should suggest
> it. (I probably won’t argue this one either way.)
> 
> Argument 5 - Numbers
> 
> draft-i-json-01 says that you MUST not put in a string representing
> a number with greater precision/magnitude than IEEE754 doubles can 
> support.   I think this is a good idea but I'm a little nervous
> because I’ve never written the code, if this is unreasonably hard
> at either the sending or receiving end someone should  say so.
> 
> ...... aaaaaaand, that’s all folks.   I’m optimistic that we can
> zero in on this one quickly.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ json mailing list 
> json@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTXq9NAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO16YQIAIgmtylb10/6Bx5tC6jSvNoF
7qNNGclLk27sUd7URx+Ol8rN8gMhmiGgNE1tbisgiBTRrLiDqkzEvexLtg37gjY4
uGR+fcA/x9tHZ/OyUaeyYyzDP/VQBFrBl4MC4IH589MueMLJL8fOj9O1/B8Uqtnb
isFjmINAB+Pu8igsRx9L/hliMNzbH9FhjdlopKtsbavgo7fqxkU3KR+7cudQAES0
YC/0dvTVgDm30mGNYe8FNfdImork3AZvZOiJL1vWEMPDVMsmwh+YQ1jLeOpiisw/
i3iiIuIUaQgiOMq527/rHNP15AU7FkFpFpS69k/vOo7tiDdAxXu63vTCm9oHtis=
=UrH/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----