Re: [Json] What are we trying to do?

[Bjoern Hoehrmann <[e-mail]>]

* Tim Bray wrote:
>I’m having trouble dealing with the recent proposals from our co-chairs
>because I don’t think I understand what they’re trying to achieve.

The chairs would like to identify patches to draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis
that reflect rough consensus and running code. I think we should accept
that this approach has failed and return to the traditional approach of
identifying substantive issues, discuss and resolve them, and then let
editors or other volunteers figure out how to implement decisions in the
draft.

>What the industry really needs is a document normatively describing
>JSON-as-best-practiced, with an RFC number.  It would say that senders MUST
>NOT do X and Y, and that receivers, upon encountering X OR Y, MUST DO Z.

I am more interested in one describing the application/json format. It
would say this is JSON and that isn't JSON and note that certain kinds
of JSON have interoperability problems and possibly note what's usually
done to mitigate them.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[e-mail] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: [phone] · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/