Re: [Json] Leading and trailing whitespace

["Jim Schaad" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Hoffman [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 7:53 PM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Json] Leading and trailing whitespace
> 
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 7:32 PM, "Jim Schaad" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > Ok - I used the wrong term - I need to get them clearer, I still am
> > trying to learn - Please read JSON text for JSON text string.  I was
> > not using string as a value in this location.
> 
> You can't ask that question because the current doc only allows arrays and
> objects at the top level, and the starting character for each of those
allow for
> white space.
> 
> You might be asking "if we allow other JSON items at the top level, will
we
> also allow optional whitespace before and after". But that's a
supposition,
> not a question about what is in the document now.

That must mean I still don't have the correct term

I have not changed the subject here.  

{"a":"b"}\r\n

Is that legal and should it be legal - the current ABNF says yes.  What do
current parsers say?

> 
> 
> >>> This makes a difference with the argument about moving all of the
> >>> values
> >> to
> >>> the top level since then the string (ignore the quotes) "   true \r\n"
> >>> cannot be matched if you just want to say it is a Boolean literal
> >>> (i.e. the non-terminator true).  Instead you need to say that it can
> >>> have whitespace on either side of it.
> >>
> >> The current grammar does not allow whitespace around "true" for that
> >> boolean value.
> >
> > Actually it does, but the whitespace comes from the container it is in.
> 
> You have changed the subject of the question, then. You were asking about
> the top level, without a container. I claim my answer is correct for the
> question you asked.
> 
> > The
> > current grammar does not allow true at the top level and if that does
> > not change then the above remains a moot point.  Note that the text
> > was talking about moving all values to the top level.
> 
> None of the objects other than arrays and objects have optional
whitespace.
> None.
> 
> > Yes -but what I am saying is that there are (probably) parsers which
> > stop before the string has been fully consumed.  Thus they would
> > accept the string as valid.
> 
> There are (probably) parsers that do all sorts of stupid, non-conformant
> things. Why is that relevant here?

We made some explicit decisions in the JOSE working group based on some of
the above issues.  I was just verifying that we had the correct assumptions
in making those decisions.

> 
> --Paul Hoffman=