IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Proposal: the minimal edit

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Sat, 22 June 2013 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 A558A21F9F8F for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 FrVWTCaMWe4U for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35CE821F9F3C for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-0-66-165.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.0.66.165]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5MIU6ss085317 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:30:06 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAChr6SyQDjik_BTojXdw3G7_B=W5iZXksuM15VYwGJqr8WHdhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:30:05 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <12894BF8-B678-44AD-981C-BE3193FEF413@vpnc.org>
References: <CAChr6SyN4Z3Hh8OFGHkK+AJN0+S09wMfjeobZ51GjKNL+GhPsw@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6ivhoUM9cfUnc1YfnyDdQnWQ=Mj10cSoYn0qouMQ0F94XA@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6SyQDjik_BTojXdw3G7_B=W5iZXksuM15VYwGJqr8WHdhw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "json@ietf.org WG" <json@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Subject: Re: [Json] Proposal: the minimal edit
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: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 18:30:07 -0000

<no hat>

On Jun 22, 2013, at 11:17 AM, R S <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> ECMAScript implementations generate and consume unpaired Unicode surrogate code points in JSON documents.
> 
> Yeah, that's fair. I'm not opposed to any text in that section that reflects reality and refrains from editorializing.

Well, Tim wanted to call the section “Stupid ECMAScript Tricks”, which seems kinda editorial. :-)

The second thing such a section would contain would be a sentence about how parsers react when they encounter an object with duplicate names. But, beside that, I'm not sure there is anything else that this section would need to cover.

If the WG went down this path, the document would need to deal with the errata for RFC 4627, but those are pretty easy.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status