IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Proposed Wording for New WG Charter

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 18 March 2014 15:46 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 790E81A0421 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:46:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 P8OaX4WoUBVM for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:46:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD091A041B for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:46:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.103] ([217.91.35.233]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M51eM-1XKfF82TlO-00zJpm; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 16:46:08 +0100
Message-ID: <53286A3E.3000907@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 16:46:06 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
References: <53277484.70305@cisco.com> <5327F05E.7060905@gmx.de> <EC3168FE-EA36-4036-8B36-974FDA7BD88E@vpnc.org> <532864FC.8040700@gmx.de> <CE6D04D1-C063-41E6-A635-3AD8127B6F28@vpnc.org> <5328687D.9050509@gmx.de> <CAHBU6ivhKzENAEkm174=o=QYs8Xj1BS4Rfw0CX_C6bnNP2riNw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6ivhKzENAEkm174=o=QYs8Xj1BS4Rfw0CX_C6bnNP2riNw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:lNJ5T0F9GShSO9nbhmNKU1GdwkE88edeCon91QfenpTiIEi4uI5 bgrJClXX+Y0DLdl02VkbNOOpFBX/DNf8g9atIP8hlHffmrJ0d4ed2kun4TNInfYYyo8TX6C tOLYAHJDWWoYpNZAE90nOeK/qyYthWFHTQbYxgauIL16xZEwX16BiJnF++qEotMLjNncOHu MAy7dRReVR4xRV9mXFH3g==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/zeJei6S211FbHAkqXe9zGVB_08I
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Proposed Wording for New WG Charter
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: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 15:46:20 -0000

On 2014-03-18 16:40, Tim Bray wrote:
> It also needs some evidence that there’s actually a real-world need, and
> that this isn’t just another solution in search of a problem.  I haven’t
> seen any such evidence yet.

The evidence is that people are abusing application/json for PATCH 
requests already. The semantics of that is undefined right now.

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email