IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Proposed Wording for New WG Charter

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Tue, 18 March 2014 15:53 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 190CC1A06E5 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 M24LcB_YmWqO for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ve0-f176.google.com (mail-ve0-f176.google.com [209.85.128.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A61E21A06D5 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ve0-f176.google.com with SMTP id cz12so7124598veb.21 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:40 -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=Fh5zwDKZNF5PRNVA3pTuqLNUKr3d+nBKjduLdGRr5uI=; b=c7ofyncnb1ik+Td0uVQHpjuTUDoqz0VpJye5yyMxF7CMyWpTaGOU4KhbQCH8dVduTd V+tR2decWwWw5EMKRwiitQI1avppk5TEiI0tHNZ5A4D3bC86PPxxwyFLKU1Rw0evuhaG UyssLdlMWSLUAEq7Wb0EbeO0DwHgLyyeT3nVt1Irk4D0L6a13VTn7f61TY4fPU0JkuhT IW6aFcPCUys8tpSNTdMyvKzD5uNW3cjyWhLQlcNAuFrTZzVSfhi9nkIZYHUlXXkSwo/H S0/AZO8luNPapnRayWdmMptJf2a4Sqw27tDesMeQHyS05MRj39Mqm0G0VoPNvG3nKKeP tBXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm/9w6NGekDyyFA01z1fPCtTWd8M8jirbGfGNVu1fR+Y3i53Ol3xtHe9YSjyRIJ3b8Z+8Al
X-Received: by 10.58.55.170 with SMTP id t10mr4341125vep.29.1395158020244; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.98.73 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32]
In-Reply-To: <53286A3E.3000907@gmx.de>
References: <53277484.70305@cisco.com> <5327F05E.7060905@gmx.de> <EC3168FE-EA36-4036-8B36-974FDA7BD88E@vpnc.org> <532864FC.8040700@gmx.de> <CE6D04D1-C063-41E6-A635-3AD8127B6F28@vpnc.org> <5328687D.9050509@gmx.de> <CAHBU6ivhKzENAEkm174=o=QYs8Xj1BS4Rfw0CX_C6bnNP2riNw@mail.gmail.com> <53286A3E.3000907@gmx.de>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:53:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6iswVDWt9=pbJoP6fMQq8jQtcVKs-vptZ7r5oR8PJpAXPA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b2e533634122604f4e38ad2"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/qFtlut5cYgbJo_hMot3LrI2xxDo
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Proposed Wording for New WG Charter
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, 18 Mar 2014 15:53:52 -0000

Got some examples?  I’ve not seen this, and a search for “json patch” on
stackoverflow.com has some discussions of the draft, but apparently nobody
actually doing it.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote:

> On 2014-03-18 16:40, Tim Bray wrote:
>
>> It also needs some evidence that there’s actually a real-world need, and
>> that this isn’t just another solution in search of a problem.  I haven’t
>> seen any such evidence yet.
>>
>
> The evidence is that people are abusing application/json for PATCH
> requests already. The semantics of that is undefined right now.
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email