IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] RFC 4627bis vs RFC 6902 (JSON Patch)

Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> Thu, 20 February 2014 19:14 UTC

Return-Path: <fgaliegue@gmail.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 ADF6B1A0243 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:14:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 1OdgzgcfoLv5 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:14:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-x22a.google.com (mail-ee0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A591A0249 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:14:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f42.google.com with SMTP id b15so1162635eek.29 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:14:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=lEZBoudCdam8MMd3d/gHfj8Sn3AkdesL+9fpV3E66hk=; b=gR4Lq/arrLfBWGe6kW+iYhHDTw/qKM38shpBO9jPyBj9z5BxDK9AX/gNcvJ/YW0Z92 0iJFE+l0T5PfDSSuKAxTSjQYVsP/oaoG3403m883oG8Xz5R6/iwJ+ha3TxZbo9p/bIOC D1bghb0r6iQKTiYJlwQTO42GDJ/YGoiJe8nkJxY7q7z+Ov6+zPeQaUNfDZNGZSBw403M M9xqqwzCzI7AvcQCwotrtNl5r2b1RFZbNYlrJspx5llRPZEMBB9zxHBYRFE0b4gWeaNe csIu3197cYZGUOqbsForHwX5Rxyt0NGB54Pff31r0A1ZhA0QUiLfvi8vVTEvM+TKj9/9 EGlQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.15.56.130 with SMTP id y2mr3671680eew.17.1392923649986; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:14:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.223.132 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:14:09 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAK3OfOheRGj=pNZodDOPf_MknMq5Y=_hOwmUyPhie5aFVbbyGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALcybBCTih9A6RL=r4WYrqf05rHsjgF4tEJP3cTY2FAmONRQaw@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOhp1C7724Qgwj98SMd0fupLdEWSGM16D6ZA8CD-ik7LvA@mail.gmail.com> <CALcybBAi9bvcnctLVHqaC0HDeJ-+rf1AyoaFu5vpE2oEE7+Nnw@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOheRGj=pNZodDOPf_MknMq5Y=_hOwmUyPhie5aFVbbyGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 20:14:09 +0100
Message-ID: <CALcybBDoZ2G07PBNWM8VD1Z2pW7MGAnZi11g+1=sf60P=EsJkw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/wiWMQ5G7litHCeBbqjtyL284i7U
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] RFC 4627bis vs RFC 6902 (JSON Patch)
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: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 19:14:17 -0000

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Francis Galiegue <fgaliegue@gmail.com> wrote:
>> OK, then what about constraints on JSON emission instead? RFC 4627bis
>> section 10 does mention that any emitted JSON must be conform to the
>> grammar; can't a condition be added that in the case of JSON objects,
>> they SHOULD ensure about the uniqueness of member names?
>
> The same issues apply here.  For example, online encoders by
> definition don't keep sufficient state.
>

Sorry, but how is that a reason? If [we|the IETF|John Doe](1) were to
care about online services and all their technical deficiencies to
push changes forward, would the Internet even move forward?

(1) remove unused mention(s)
-- 
Francis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com
JSON Schema in Java: http://json-schema-validator.herokuapp.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email