Re: [Json] Proposal: the minimal edit

If we’re doing an ECMAdiff section... Since 4627 says “A string is a
sequence of zero or more Unicode characters [UNICODE]” by definition this
cannot include unpaired surrogates, since they’re not .

So in Rob’s proposed section:

ECMAScript implementations generate and consume unpaired Unicode surrogate
code points in JSON documents.

On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 9:57 AM, R S <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> From charter:
>
> "The work is essentially a reclassification in place, with minimal
> changes. The working group will review errata and update the document as
> needed to incorporate those, and will correct significant errors and inconsistencies,
> but will keep changes to a minimum."
>
> I propose a new section, to appear after "Generators" and before "IANA
> Considerations"
>
> + N. Differences from ECMAScript
> +
> + ECMAScript implementations produce and consume primitive JSON values at
> the
> + root level of JSON documents.
>
> It's my opinion that none of the errors or inconsistencies present in the
> document are significant, since JSON works pretty well. I'll probably
> oppose any edits that aren't to the introduction or the security
> considerations, including updates to references such as ABNF and Unicode.
> Note that the IETF does not update all standards track documents with
> obsolete references, which demonstrates that leaving the current references
> in place is tractable.
>
> - Rob
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>
>