Re: [Json] Regarding JSON text sequence ambiguities (Re: serializing sequences of JSON values)

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Thu, 13 March 2014 21:43 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.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 CD5D01A0A4A for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.478
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FRT_ADOBE2=2.455, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 U_DvwvOmcpZx for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ve0-f176.google.com (mail-ve0-f176.google.com [209.85.128.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E0631A0778 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ve0-f176.google.com with SMTP id cz12so1768435veb.21 for <json@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=JWcBET01PMCGVoTllNhr4E8S4JGAJmsr1G+tXICMM00=; b=BLDRBbrVbY4HpQveu7Ube9mllBY61J4B2WjbBmUPLU2xODpI0QQDPdU5deoOdNR4M2 9PymZ/7DRy2R/x/e+GCFGag27bLCF7oDSKD/mxABGOYaTTyOKn15gNM11WYKqQD5D2Q+ MJIu2ToSTO96AJdPVX5u3UBXLTq6Sjjn6+RN0eegTO425uIwk2LZXP1JoY2O6sGjQieb 0ls+c2UwJMDpQNK/+DNh1Sn6cI+Rn2u0UnCKOgF1TZdp5nAeArmkEGBqWEAmcVFwcniw lPu7KNo4hucwQ6JTgHHz2D5xEbRQ3e3pDf+F498/Shte8auQcf70zsW2l55ZjqS3TjD0 QSYw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkxAA23HhR3oVyxNUSwHwPQjPKPbwk3yNpRDeTgIXa/kuScCjpt3UzpRiebY3Pc7KNCmVXG
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.58.188.78 with SMTP id fy14mr3306145vec.23.1394747005488; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.98.73 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [96.49.81.176]
In-Reply-To: <3416a6327a8a4cd3b49bee3c2e548870@BL2PR02MB307.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAK3OfOj_XQJq-JKAjNdH-GuH0_UwZfeWntgyyizMpTLmSaWQoA@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOio58+1yuxQOcvWep1CADMfE1PVC48XDid0dWvd8=SVjA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOXDeqoYb=NXz4ikMxAg3EHFA+903bFgdpR_BL-K18U2oYriXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOiPDfWpOZgExTmwwq6WFcuVbyi_z3C0=M9RhQveBhV_+w@mail.gmail.com> <3416a6327a8a4cd3b49bee3c2e548870@BL2PR02MB307.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:43:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6ivNYxXr4E_=W8e+vAoJyUEJ5MbXiyCT33M8y74uYPpZqg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013a12f0d0647104f483d77c
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/wvlkPm_GA1WAs19sNSO3_-Ytj6s
Cc: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>, Matthew Morley <matt@mpcm.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Regarding JSON text sequence ambiguities (Re: serializing sequences of JSON values)
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, 13 Mar 2014 21:43:34 -0000

I’m halfway convinced that it might be useful to say that if you are
persisting something as chunks of JSON, use X as a separator.  I wouldn’t
be surprised to see the advent of standardized log-as-JSON libraries. I’d
go further and say that if you are doing this, use objects too.  Having
said that, it’s not obvious that this is the kind of format that you’d
interchange much, so the case for a media type is weak.


On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:

> > Arguably JSON text sequences are a new format,
>
> yes
>
> > deserving of its own MIME type and so on.
>
> no, not all formats need MIME types. There are infinitely many formats.
> MIME is one way of noting a file format and distinguishing it from others,
> but most applications don't NEED to name the types they accept and in
> general, they can't.
>
> I think to justify a new MIME type, you need to provide a concrete use
> case that would actually use it and need it.  In most of the
> content-negotiation scenarios, MIME types are far too course-grained to
> express content-features.
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>