Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps
"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Thu, 24 December 2020 16:35 UTC
Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
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 586E83A1308 for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 08:35:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 oloO5MPrvNW1 for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 08:35:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1E8E3A1307 for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 08:35:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com with SMTP id x26so1564251vsq.1 for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 08:35:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=08amglmstEw8dF4fW4NwSc54IikXnqXijnYKzxZ4apk=; b=aIbyMNxD5lSqpsT8qPDssgYV7gQMzG3CR3EA0CUG2fbAgZZKT1Wf9VtZd/3s3fetCE ljOp3uueb9aD05cUrDWKdVaoMsc45vDalhGqLc15otbPl1kVjkdy+OpEJw8niWv6NF1L z9bVUVxM2iclysjGFe1OkLlkHKJWEH5oqdaMeJWCv2fXM5xKXSH6/fJKuWuRoN7Zu01J bHWdidgpWbq+Y5fDuH1gKxykUcb7VBoCt6eqJNtVJ0k/HX/C7OI7OWR2Zd5sOPD0ZhoG 7xvw4QhoYob1ze88qA3TISJZ7GbyrNLXQ9GTp/2Csuj+yVxIt2GYXJX4YOOmJq9Dyu9A 6dNw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=08amglmstEw8dF4fW4NwSc54IikXnqXijnYKzxZ4apk=; b=jBsl0if91njcazIXWjHfmf8UPu7fW5OX4qBb2cTUlEemJEq5ZLusFE+noHvsWcGsoE x4oRQzNUEvTqrGWldNIy9qHDrGpLi+N8t/FHEmhjiRZwoQB1x1xkER5dx8Y0e1l1t6j+ DBMc7rwRidzPsZF0o3jJRnS0YugdOOobzizvESoexRexAXPM/l/1jkehJs7eP9U2sxDl WcZSjZ/Y9VXxzz74aHdX5slK/hFcMfQnIp6OGIYkgfpdCnW4jYc29+9ySq98PioSGrou INQyPJuJTR2ZNpWpUt3EWMi8kfoRN2ckgw033cbxB2VAQRQPpx1qofdq52d4GzqJAVBB /WIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ZMn/PmJVkqAsJp/UNkUxzSFyTtVUQC+KLq7CdZsnBixhH8cmK RAaNNcWgXhPanNEiaSFUvzvDoW9+HFjqldG1LEY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyuqvQTHKCXr6tdlI8HIg1ZVseAPubBOMX6zzhJ3T0p4ql94nnKsSltDBniE+wOY5RJR78dVD6QuwIfYKnOJnM=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:18c6:: with SMTP id 189mr21550351vsy.54.1608827742670; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 08:35:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHBU6isXOWxuNT2_kdo_ZBoqJpTyt59W+0-FMmjRvbPGLhNWNA@mail.gmail.com> <00da063e49dd4ba176651eb5b52b01bbf18522ac.camel@gmail.com> <86F20551-0819-4D0E-B987-5B2D39CE86CF@tzi.org> <CAHBU6itytz9zvgSm2NJO_9PwGUV6pNOujOK54r4tXX9wXGu8WA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6itytz9zvgSm2NJO_9PwGUV6pNOujOK54r4tXX9wXGu8WA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 08:35:31 -0800
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwbdZW2um2c+5+e0yAivmdnK=8T1Wu8JAOHsv=Zct=sL_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Glyn Normington <glyn.normington.work@gmail.com>, jsonpath@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001b513b05b73866a5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jsonpath/e1meu3xxgRIB6_0DJYZDVyAz_1c>
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 16:35:45 -0000
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 >> >>
- [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Tim Bray
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Tim Bray
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Glyn Normington
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Tim Bray
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Julian Reschke
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Stefan Hagen
- Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath WG next steps Glyn Normington