IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps

Stefan Hagen <stefan@dilettant.eu> Thu, 24 December 2020 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan@dilettant.eu>
X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E4E3A132D for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 09:22:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dilettant.eu
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 W9ql-_s9-gCY for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 09:22:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailrelay3-3.pub.mailoutpod1-cph3.one.com (mailrelay3-3.pub.mailoutpod1-cph3.one.com [46.30.212.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C82E13A0C35 for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 09:22:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dilettant.eu; s=20191106; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version:from: content-transfer-encoding:content-type:from; bh=i9oJDNQpr86brca3pCcPU3AedmMJLFd1wrP/HLfRbl8=; b=R6xwxSEKi6zMq9Gp2GeFow3irWy/jOXZOgk1d1GYcHkFJr07EUTsmUfUbIAUFMuJrjOM8oeJXHWpC 6WP8XcC2Rmf5+FI4d7Ardh6l0mkmbyUqd6A4BF1/smQgO2nNB+SIs+FN1xofFNf7bD/bzB5cJD/VRF SUvaSi9O9nmIgAzHdm0UBvbb3eB+SVT8PU13y/6oXltXjv9Xm/KIqyqLcu1VEy6uhQ356rPhaWRTft pJBbrKRNOdM5t+UFTjhKTinClYdY82gbkNTdEAzfrv+rbkaxvAuxXj3oQKJ3IX1ipKaSLoW/HpPJMk k0ScpmdnidW/fIv5jYL6mC4RZj3sUlg==
X-HalOne-Cookie: 0cacd4b0d6b2451c85a491ae9ad1597a1ae58568
X-HalOne-ID: 87b10f98-460c-11eb-8cb9-d0431ea8bb03
Received: from [192.168.1.112] (60.248.197.178.dynamic.dsl-lte-bonding.zhbmb00p-msn.res.cust.swisscom.ch [178.197.248.60]) by mailrelay3.pub.mailoutpod1-cph3.one.com (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 87b10f98-460c-11eb-8cb9-d0431ea8bb03; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:21:59 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-DBF005C6-890A-41A7-BE22-E4762DDCAFB5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stefan Hagen <stefan@dilettant.eu>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:21:59 +0100
Message-Id: <48DC8041-83F9-42C7-A2B6-F7C7EC7382A6@dilettant.eu>
References: <CAL0qLwbdZW2um2c+5+e0yAivmdnK=8T1Wu8JAOHsv=Zct=sL_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, jsonpath@ietf.org, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwbdZW2um2c+5+e0yAivmdnK=8T1Wu8JAOHsv=Zct=sL_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (18C66)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jsonpath/ELLM4nnsppsySO2r2rXoT3Q_xNo>
Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps
X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page <jsonpath.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jsonpath>, <mailto:jsonpath-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jsonpath/>
List-Post: <mailto:jsonpath@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jsonpath-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath>, <mailto:jsonpath-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:22:06 -0000

> Am 24.12.2020 um 17:35 schrieb Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>:
> 
> 
> I suggest draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-00.
> 
> -MSK
> 
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 11:51 PM Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
>> Hmm, draft-ietf-jsonpath-00 certainly wouldn't offend me, but on the other hand there's a lot to be said for sticking to conventions.  I'm imagining someone writing a bot to plow through WG drafts and relying on the convention. I've added Murray to the "To" line to see if he has an opinion.  James? Anyone else?
>> 
>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 11:27 PM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>>> On 2020-12-24, at 08:14, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > Out of interest, why the "stutter" in the name? Wouldn't draft-ietf-
>>> > jsonpath-00 be less cumbersome? I don't feel strongly, but it would be
>>> > good to know the rationale.
>>> 
>>> Internet-draft naming for WG documents is
>>> 
>>> draft-ietf-wgname-subject-subject-subject-nn
>>> 
>>> Now if there is only one draft in the WG, we might leave the subject off entirely.
>>> I actually find a few cases where this has been done:
>>> 
>>> draft-ietf-cnrp-12.txt
>>> draft-ietf-geojson-04.txt
>>> draft-ietf-gsmp-11.txt
>>> draft-ietf-itrace-04.txt
>>> draft-ietf-lisp-24.txt
>>> draft-ietf-otp-01.txt
>>> draft-ietf-sming-02.txt
>>> draft-ietf-upsmib-05.txt
>>> 
>>> Most of these are older cases (1994 to 2006, with geojson at 2016 being the newest), but it sure could be done again.
>>> 
>>> (Some of the WGs then did develop further drafts with non-empty subject parts, e.g., lisp.)
>>> 
>>> Grüße, Carsten
>>> 
I second draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-00

Grüße, Stefan

> -- 
> Jsonpath mailing list
> Jsonpath@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email