Re: [Json] Kicking Off JSONbis

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 17 November 2015 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 30D0B1ACDBB for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:45:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] 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 7llTbtbABz9Q for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:45:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BA801ACDB6 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:45:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.47.60.90] (50-1-98-110.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.98.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id tAHFjMPR029561 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 08:45:25 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-1-98-110.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.98.110] claimed to be [10.47.60.90]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:45:22 -0800
Message-ID: <C83DDEDB-B32D-4D95-A3BA-08791D3EB8EE@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <564AF072.6010901@gmx.de>
References: <DB74C466-D542-42D6-95B0-690A564435A9@cisco.com> <CAC4RtVD3cKThDTr_eS-QCUhKqZkMS0y+nPS5HxCk3f1RQ7VyJQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6iv_w_O95Nq-bU1z2GOKgouuGrMbZP4Uwio25pPtFCc3UQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJ+==5_mstrgHEd7bUGzSo85Er9VR_zEaJ+gh-O+zSpK=w@mail.gmail.com> <88A80A45-E673-4D0A-995B-3872874C23AE@cisco.com> <CALaySJJ01gEoHqZ4ehVHzv8mqD1CXKV3Ave3yQPrgrAGe4yckg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6iuxBvn3ug9LwcK9gvrQDLr1uz=3NCrcrZaejF2iUwiLVA@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6SzuxZrCJ+Gfc9LkKX88SetAOTp3GpxpxVF1CmmT3j5MoQ@mail.gmail.com> <56241BFE.5080609@tzi.org> <2DB105A8-AB80-4386-915D-D9AD1FBF77AD@cisco.com> <CAHBU6it7Na+5=Xhdq+cOh8o0eNq_iuanWX_hKdpggPabUGfYgQ@mail.gmail.com> <73F1E21E-3E3D-4EFB-A1B2-AF713EA30461@cisco.com> <564AF072.6010901@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.2r5141)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/rKdcGQ7MENNH0eWRWgtSdpojPgQ>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 08:31:13 -0800
Subject: Re: [Json] Kicking Off JSONbis
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 17 Nov 2015 15:45:27 -0000

On 17 Nov 2015, at 1:16, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2015-11-17 10:06, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
>> ...
>>> 2. I don't like this sort of nudge-nudge, wink-wink language. If we 
>>> want to provide this language, don't tell them to go search 404 for 
>>> “interoperability challenges”. Rather, a simple statement along 
>>> these
>>> lines would be appropriate.  “This document contains several 
>>> recommendations for best practices to avoid interoperability 
>>> problems.   ECMA-404 enforces none of these, thus implementations 
>>> based on it might potentially emit JON texts which exhibit these 
>>> problems.“
>>
>> Perhaps we need to reference 262 explicitly as well, then.
>> ...
>
>
> So one needs ECMA 262 (Javascript) to implement JSON?

In the ECMA world, yes. I would hope that we would not require that for 
JSONbis other than by informational reference.

--Paul Hoffman