IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] BOMs

"Pete Cordell" <petejson@codalogic.com> Wed, 20 November 2013 11:44 UTC

Return-Path: <petejson@codalogic.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 8E48D1AD73F for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 03:44:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.837
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.837 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.439] 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 HKpu0XNFsSxE for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 03:44:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsa-online.com (lvps217-199-162-192.vps.webfusion.co.uk [217.199.162.192]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796A91ADBFF for <json@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 03:44:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 22106 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2013 11:44:04 +0000
Received: from host81-129-187-193.range81-129.btcentralplus.com (HELO codalogic) (81.129.187.193) by lvps217-199-162-217.vps.webfusion.co.uk with ESMTPSA (RC4-MD5 encrypted, authenticated); 20 Nov 2013 11:44:04 +0000
Message-ID: <8A41EDC97C8243A39CED3D08964C27FD@codalogic>
From: Pete Cordell <petejson@codalogic.com>
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
References: <AA45B3C6-1DC5-4B1E-8045-C9FE76022584@vpnc.org><CEA92854.2CC53%jhildebr@cisco.com><20131113224737.GI31823@mercury.ccil.org><f5bob5n71y7.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk><5284B095.4070004@it.aoyama.ac.jp><C37B2FE59C164DBCA982AC81A56A09AA@codalogic><f5bk3g6ufqy.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk><5289F974.9020709@it.aoyama.ac.jp><020401cee50f$a2cdf5c0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net><528B46EA.4040503@it.aoyama.ac.jp><43255615-2FC9-4726-99FD-1B13D6B1F033@wirfs-brock.com><f5br4ackyqm.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk><528C5445.3050600@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <f5bd2lvl628.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk>
X-Unsent: 1
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:45:35 -0000
x-vipre-scanned: 00DDBA92005BF800DDBBDF
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Cc: www-tag@w3.org, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] BOMs
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: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:44:33 -0000

----- Original Message From: "Henry S. Thompson"

> I agree that XML is a useful point of comparison, in particular
> because it too does not allow a BOM as part of an XML document, but
> rather treats it as an aspect of packaging/transport external to the
> XML document, which seems to me to be the kind of approach to BOMs the
> JSON WG might consider.


If I remember rightly, XML demotes notes about encoding detection and BOMs 
to a rather lowly (informational?) appendix.  Maybe that's something JSON 
should do in the interests of interoperability (AKA avoidance of confusion - 
which there seems to be a lot of).

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
C++ tools for C++ programmers, http://codalogic.com
Read & write XML in C++, http://www.xml2cpp.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email