IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jsonpath] WG adoption draft-bormann-jsonpath-iregexp-02

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 19 January 2022 23:32 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 B40BB3A089A for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 15:32:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 0m13xGj-qTsE for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 15:32:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 439723A0897 for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 15:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (p5089a436.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.164.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4JfMP04fBBzDCcP; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 00:32:04 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <B878DADB-23DB-4590-9B62-AAB0F893EE19@saxonica.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 00:32:04 +0100
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, jsonpath@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9343D2DD-C707-4E83-8DA1-F485B2F5ABFF@tzi.org>
References: <CAHBU6ivTZC+qn1gDct6JDT3gZFgEZFkZ3HQyR0nGh_1A28K09A@mail.gmail.com> <B878DADB-23DB-4590-9B62-AAB0F893EE19@saxonica.com>
To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.40.0.1.81)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jsonpath/FsD-dYDZ67qyzzF6EFUwPC6BtUo>
Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] WG adoption draft-bormann-jsonpath-iregexp-02
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: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 23:32:16 -0000

On 18. Jan 2022, at 19:30, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
> 
> I would suggest referencing XSD 1.1 rather than XSD 1.0.
> 
> The only difference in the regex capabilities is that XSD 1.1 fixes some bugs in the specification. It would be a shame to have a normative reference to a spec with known bugs.

I have made a pull request that references XSD 1.1 as well.

https://github.com/cabo/iregexp/pull/3

This PR recognizes the fact that XSD 1.0 is more widely implemented than XSD 1.1.
Both RFC 7950 and RFC 8610 reference only XSD 1.0 (and imply that an astute consumer of any specification will handle the errata with that, especially if they have been known for a decade and more).
Potentially giving the impression that I-Regexp somehow needs XSD 1.1, which brings a lot of baggage that is not relevant here, would be highly misleading.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email