Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath draft charter

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 2020-09-02, at 19:54, Tim Bray <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I made https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/charter/pull/2 to say changes to JMESPath and JSON Pointer are not contemplated. I actually don't have much of an opinion as to whether this is an improvement, so I'm OK either way. 

I think the IESG usually wants much stronger language than “not contemplated” for the charter exclusions.  For me, that is already implicit in the statement of what it does do, so this language might even be a step backwards.

I would simply say “These are out of scope for the WG” at the end of the penultimate paragraph, but that may not be entirely true either:
We may want to describe the two-way mapping between JSON Pointer and JSONPath for a subset (or an important part of that subset) where that two-way mapping exists.

So that would make it:

> These approaches are out of scope for the WG, except that it may be
> useful to describe the mapping between subsets of JSON Pointer and
> JSONPath.

(If that turns out to be a bad restriction, we can always ask for a recharter later, so there is no need for weaselwords.)

Now https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/charter/pull/3

Grüße, Carsten