IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] I-JSON Topic #5: Numbers

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Mon, 28 April 2014 21:12 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.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 559EE1A7030 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.377
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 UAovVsaeVEDK for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com (mail-vc0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B551A6FBB for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id lf12so6539627vcb.41 for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=K/7QY2aPZKloj5a0WSuZv8P2Baf03JxlS4MdB1NJfFs=; b=hcph11Pf0ElGwHbit6MMsF3pwdbiXTPPvv8vCf2q59Uiy55hCZgK74Ei3dIpfS7PtC 2SLUJ2+57GeR7yHlWET34Cp9g4ey8zldi53QcZ3jYEpL4OCateuuzD+6isCJQKe4Akzc 5dP3DT0LILzPN8amnRqmQxs3POq41m+YpXygRyRGeDpaTI7cor2FEcvUrjgWE1D9AhX3 vYoUDraPTkIEpSyLhNF5JC0p4QVeMFjrOM43mbhRgcNNx/++fQXOXpPoBvZ9jBc1K2/u OgjkGmq7vnTl9SAlO7/ErbxYhvxLb2Rv3zIUi49/NZPn61fsHVOVt66nKUNGO0xSvESl fnDA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlU94Yl8iNf/MYNHNarVfgcof4ll9XSR8fq2zS5NecHaHN2Em2abGlfhMu2RLIqvQJygL7N
X-Received: by 10.58.31.136 with SMTP id a8mr26480125vei.20.1398719525450; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.98.73 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [96.49.81.176]
In-Reply-To: <CF841AAE.47D86%jhildebr@cisco.com>
References: <535EB3BF.8080606@cisco.com> <CAHBU6ivjF9ULW0yGSVdJi2D6QgUThuhym_ZhpgLM=cvLu=mAiQ@mail.gmail.com> <CF841AAE.47D86%jhildebr@cisco.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:11:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6itK5HtSTPWSsHsHUPja90emqU86LsgjrBorkqcUDivS2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b2e49d07487ec04f820c4a3"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/pxdtHcq2UQvdkNilNtYYrhjgM9A
Cc: IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>, "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Json] I-JSON Topic #5: Numbers
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 21:12:07 -0000

Well, they’re disallowed in JSON let alone i-json so I’d have hoped we can
ignore them.


On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) <
jhildebr@cisco.com> wrote:

> Will we need to talk about subnormals, -0, NaN, Infinity, and the like?
>
>
> On 4/28/14, 2:22 PM, "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
>
> >It occurs to me that it would be super-useful for the draft to include
> >explanation of how to follow this rule, including examples of printf and
> >Java format strings.
> >
> >
> >
> >On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Matt Miller
> ><mamille2@cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA512
> >
> >"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."
> >
> >If you have suggestions for better text -- or other comments/concerns
> >on this language -- please respond to this thread with your
> >suggestions or reasoning.
>
>
> --
> Joe Hildebrand
>
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email