Re: [Json] I-JSON Tpic #2: Top-Level

Protocols with messages which are objects are better than other protocols,
because they are architecturally friendly to MustIgnore policies.

Allowing top-level JSON to be a primitive - true, null, 42 - is batshit
crazy for anything the IETF might contemplate, and one of I-JSON’s main
virtues is ruling that out.

I don’t think top-level arrays are actively harmful at the same level, but
the MustIgnore is a pretty big value-add, forcing people to sort-of
future-proof themselves even when they haven’t realized why that’s a good
idea.

So I’d leave it object-only.

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> "draft-i-json-01 says the top level is an object (but doesn’t say
> MUST, eek).  I have heard arguments for allowing arrays too."
>
> If you are in favor -- or not -- of restricting the top-level I-JSON
> text to only be object (or array / object), please respond to this
> thread with your reasoning.
>
>
> - --
> - - m&m
>
> Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com >
> Cisco Systems, Inc.
>
> * "How to Argue about I-JSON" <
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/current/msg02775.html >
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTXrEZAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO1bjAH/RxLeWEABXMoJEJrw92lYfkP
> bLgoS7TRoSxVdUY9K8SVMEJKHMrY2QrK/aNqhwlpWvIirM70xFUT7Sb40M+Msmm/
> qFZTFfVRdRsnqsd21dciZ6hA4eSDfkP81cIoMn4MiCx8EExZCj7yroWaTor8jNct
> 7BgVCWkom2ENVNOb6JEPFa7LD6hpm/9vx1FHctbDgreJuhsYxY9Uy17h/BjxxwPc
> NkNFbo+OX4Zw6f053cKWbITps/R+IAM57atzJ9PgGpMpN+POQJF/BihnB1qRdUsv
> y8QqQ1s8r47DauWQ0eX4BxgPXeGV+jBqXrtVAzyNq2B7KFkDukf9UVahUaJjwJU=
> =nAfX
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>