Re: [Jsonpath] [dispatch] draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Mon, 14 September 2020 00:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 9EAB63A0921; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 17:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-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=mnot.net header.b=qkIOR99y; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=HNraz2D4
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 W_D9zGxC2hbV; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 17:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77CC73A0917; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 17:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3513E5D1; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 20:20:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 13 Sep 2020 20:20:08 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm3; bh=T czHUEPPE7bfk6+lbMP7aJfoJ447JvHRFEHc+3eVWjE=; b=qkIOR99yYc3ZgSXqA 5814pTS9DRh2BAJ1GLsqOO4bOiKtWRMqdp1TB4+2Olj7OYU6pMQ9SPMWLnBhBMRP vQwn9qbbQvgKEpFpo2X92bjaVOxbYRWazxxG5SQKmF003YY+k8GSyDB726XQcbRK YF9PvHn9YGPMVep/S0izC0iHuSa9P9ufl+46aoVgCnBij8hCl4C11NXrrRuX1tv0 aFWlWNrgoCZP2q9OFDIlw+aKhFS8yVgeWalernB3+JMYUPP6rxI+buX6xt41sBbK V5umLlUbvHoteWAoQfR0He7RAYIoAR6qp8r2rveLTrfwwXI/74SI/TIU6tXwSNGH m3+UA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=TczHUEPPE7bfk6+lbMP7aJfoJ447JvHRFEHc+3eVW jE=; b=HNraz2D4KXqwmyffN6qV6dhIKTx0/ngggsraXjR2H7dtBR14PTIO2OZ2q euWRRjn5J2qB9zDnxD8AEwl5xvaaqBx/Je8a1nWo4z21N6MwaqMZLg2R+xduU2ia RwgQ3SNB2FPekdFPonZaS/frFYgKf68pj+yyLjT92/LKmg2MhNsMeKBV2q286ifM Wcpj/WO+4gzm41va+qc2VEWp4rEPy/KZkfI4xgGyNr5Psmqjp7Ajs0qnS8VPShh6 eXju/q9tN0sLP3rjvw9CC3xavxcgmF4subBQZJKEuQsIkJN4F7KKCKQ79VapqIRN gGhZveZeYPFqfoWW0yMoGACV5y2tA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:NrdeXyUekFGdPg0d_ieNUTVwdPi57qdBK4rK2ZRoPbTQSGORdpgqtg> <xme:NrdeX-kvhF0R-OR9l_E4OM2xWvazkC99EBROeDWvYQZKCkvfSeq2lZkXsx6LMyi9J Mx0k-ZhmGW3XwlN8w>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrudeihedgfeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeeffedvvedtueefteduvdevhfejgfehuefhgfeujeevudeuuedvhefgvdeilefg teenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgpdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpmhhnohhtrd hnvghtnecukfhppeduudelrddujedrudehkedrvdehudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigv pedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:NrdeX2YUgMSjjIzA5OPKII97I6EutqFwmnKXhyKW_2DLp24JyO_cGA> <xmx:NrdeX5W_x0P4ex6fTaQHX2yfS2NFfkpLfY2lerQIUqvICecolOhgHA> <xmx:NrdeX8k0zGHIxsGKwfg7xFRdy8O6xJ1czPU9elXFly9xlTuX0Gwo3Q> <xmx:N7deX2gHl7aQXYJw-Cr7kBLH4LOqU64ReSW3AsXQFkfntvpZav-bpQ>
Received: from [192.168.7.30] (119-17-158-251.77119e.mel.static.aussiebb.net [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 45D4C3064688; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 20:20:05 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZx24X_-3_Ty0J_P5_Nf7VOp2AmpTgtfqyKB0JrE8EY4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:20:01 +1000
Cc: DISPATCH list <dispatch@ietf.org>, jsonpath@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <92BFBB4F-54B7-4E14-B322-A8B323631584@mnot.net>
References: <159467093010.19477.7181341398452455173@ietfa.amsl.com> <77B617C1-2148-4AE6-8428-DAD43D01FBC5@tzi.org> <3B8242C5-CACE-4E85-AF0A-A0C6F77A5EDB@tzi.org> <CAL0qLwZx24X_-3_Ty0J_P5_Nf7VOp2AmpTgtfqyKB0JrE8EY4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jsonpath/_WKMAoIM13dX9Z4iu9u2ya8aaTU>
Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] [dispatch] draft-goessner-dispatch-jsonpath-00.txt
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: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 00:20:12 -0000

This seems reasonable. 

As I mentioned in the session, I think there's a non-trivial amount of risk here that some implementations won't be willing or able to move away from their current behaviours, even if interoperability would improve if they did so. However, there are ways to mitigate that (e.g., a separate 'rfcxxxx compliant' mode). Even so, it will be important to get good participation from as many current implementers as possible.

Two nits in the charter text:

1) I don't think it's necessary to compare this effort to JSONPointer; they do different things (querying a document vs. referring to a particular part of a document), just as XPath and XPointer do different things. Each has a place, it's not a matter of compatibility or supplanting JSONPath. So, 'Other, incompatible approaches exist... but have not succeeded in supplanting JSONPath' should be removed.

2) If this charter is predicated on adopting a specific draft, it should be listed (e.g., as we did in <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-quic/01/>).

Cheers,


> On 14 Sep 2020, at 10:02 am, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 9:39 AM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> We now have had the discussion about a proposed charter over at the JSON Path list, and the resulting proposed charter, based on an initial proposal by Tim Bray, is at:
> 
> https://github.com/jsonpath-wg/charter/blob/master/charter.txt
> 
> I have set a reply-to to dispatch@ietf.org.  The IETF mailman recently has been ignoring that, so here’s the manual version: Please keep the discussion that is relevant to the dispatch process on the dispatch list (and keep spinoff threads that are not really relevant to that to the JSONPath list).
> 
> Unless the DISPATCH community has additional feedback over the next week or two, I'll take that text and start it on its journey.
> 
> -MSK
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/