Re: [Json] Limitations on number size?

"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> Wed, 10 July 2013 01:37 UTC

Return-Path: <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F8E121F9A23 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 18:37:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.369
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.369 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.936, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7G9LuVPaz5+4 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 18:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x236.google.com (mail-ob0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E4621F9A18 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 18:36:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f182.google.com with SMTP id va7so7815373obc.13 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mZmtufgozQQwDyoqWZ8BFcVW/Jzu3C24Res8pXVDzgc=; b=prZWzgfE7BhUrj1pJ5L9OYNAWP90O+Cgf/gp0f7WMrKxUUEMh8TYmdORmOnunTLRex 0Rh39k27txQ1GUqn44Sdt7Q3PvXy2j/txBFZTKPscEY9u9D5WBET1QJeMJqwkt03LW/K 7KvcBNBByl1BDU6Su4IFEiQ+7/lPpiJmy4EA40fmzjXWgki5i7iz2tuQ7Keud6gXvfcS GHNatYFeXkQ7EeDBdl9BlyqOUW353phvCtjJpHPImNSXDIaxqZ4F0b9uHGhI3LwlF4xF LujtOIt7ReW4DOmRnzF0pE+JCllAxMIiD6dQASezhROve7xmkYXKPX2coxU2YX3taBLW Ln6A==
X-Received: by 10.182.231.131 with SMTP id tg3mr5192616obc.44.1373420210737; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (out-on-158.wireless.telus.com. [207.219.69.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o8sm6190298obx.11.2013.07.09.18.36.48 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51DCBAAF.20200@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:36:47 -0700
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130514 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@gmail.com>
References: <51DC0F95.7010407@gmail.com> <hf8ot8hnpa93pi3t54c4d5qcc3p5tnb3ca@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <CAK3OfOgTNaLpRthrRcU4Bo+3z1aXUOOn0Ord7RBPN8z6TtiiWw@mail.gmail.com> <51DC7F87.6060503@gmail.com> <CAGrxA24v5L7oCGxEOwecJSLCNiLrSWSt=jFJMA0M9E8fztNLag@mail.gmail.com> <51DC95B2.8080801@gmail.com> <CAGrxA27oa8dyUA=sR9rGLq4rE3G3rofPsSXXJnUk2w4PF4L_Bw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGrxA27oa8dyUA=sR9rGLq4rE3G3rofPsSXXJnUk2w4PF4L_Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Limitations on number size?
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 10 Jul 2013 01:37:01 -0000

My reasoning is more like:

I was trying to find the answer to Y about X in the defining document for X 
and the only thing related to Y there (or related to Y in anything pointed to 
from there) was Z so Z should be the answer.

Yes, this isn't quite the situation, but it's close.

Yes, this isn't the way things should work in a defining document, but that's 
the situation with respect to this defining document.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider



On 07/09/2013 06:12 PM, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider 
> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Where then am I supposed to go to find out what a JSON number
>     represents?   There are many possibilities (float only, rational only,
>     separate integer and float, separate rational and float,
>     variable-precision decimal only, separate integer and variable-precision
>     decimal, variable precision float only, ...). And then there are the
>     various range possibilities.
>
>     The only suitable guidance provided in RFC4627 is via ECMAScript and
>     ECMAScript is firmly IEEE floating point double only.
>
>     So why are you surprised that I came up with this conclusion?
>
>
> So your proof is of the form "I was trying to find answer to X; and the only 
> answer I found was Y; thereby it MUST BE the right answer"? That is a 
> logical fallacy of some kind.
>
> But you are right in that perhaps I should not be surprised. Different 
> people reach different conclusions all the time, even if given same information.
>
> -+ Tatu +-
>
>     peter
>
>
>
>
>     On 07/09/2013 02:34 PM, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
>
>         I am surprised you came to this conclusion, since I assumed we were
>         finally getting rid of misconception that JSON is closely tied to
>         Javascript.
>
>         This is not to say that the way JSON (under-)defines numbers is
>         optimal; but at this point forcing castrated version of numbers --
>         which would lead to practical problems like preventing use of 64-bit
>         longs for timestamps -- would be counter-productive and to me a
>         non-starter.
>
>         -+ Tatu +-
>
>
>
>