IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath draft charter

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 02 September 2020 09:37 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 2E4683A0F55 for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 02:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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 2LP1aZ1N3a0W for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 02:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A93BA3A0F4F for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 02:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BhJkJ18tfzygh; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 11:37:12 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <F868B402-52BE-4E79-84D8-13C000F0942F@vmware.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2020 11:37:11 +0200
Cc: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, "jsonpath@ietf.org" <jsonpath@ietf.org>, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 620732231.55644-c1c54d04c22c58ec8f495851c8388525
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B91DEC0E-FE52-48DE-88BD-DD7C2109DD5A@tzi.org>
References: <mailman.38.1597172408.10748.jsonpath@ietf.org> <CA+mwktKSMn0e3Xh5K3z-wxeC_icx3dnepWvxKu74miGqLb_wxA@mail.gmail.com> <AEE0C02D-DF63-4CEF-AC78-08180BC0B0F2@tzi.org> <CAHBU6ivxaeKRm8+5_DiP=qtpiWXEffD374n6dxx4bgJTt1nCbw@mail.gmail.com> <22C87C6B-F7FB-4074-8EEF-118AA28AB61B@tzi.org> <3AC3C075-2CA3-4DDC-BEE8-C3C4B179A61B@vmware.com> <CAHBU6ivA79KFJa4DfO4BEdGJ1K9pWP+cgHC4tegNjW90favxAw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwb4WtQEKcnPmPYhkXp4_0rYjJKC52SEVtuxiG3MCVtXjQ@mail.gmail.com> <2498CFE1-D301-4238-AD9E-926817C4D7E5@tzi.org> <F868B402-52BE-4E79-84D8-13C000F0942F@vmware.com>
To: Glyn Normington <normingtong@vmware.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jsonpath/vp1-T4CqGDAO95_T672V_R4UhWQ>
Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] JSONPath draft charter
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, 02 Sep 2020 09:37:16 -0000

On 2020-09-02, at 11:29, Glyn Normington <normingtong@vmware.com> wrote:
> 
> I’m happy to submit a PR for either of the above, but I hesitate because I don’t know how much detail charters typically include.

Hi Glyn,

A charter is a “contract” between IESG and WG, which gives the WG a certain portfolio, but doesn’t need to spell out all the background and all the work.
It is used by the WG chairs to reign in possible mission creep (and failing that, by the responsible AD), so that’s why we usually want to have a well-defined scope.  

I’d say: Saying that we do JSONPath already says that we are not doing JMESPath.
A little more background (3 words saying there are 40+ implementations, and how JSONPath differs from [is a superset of] RFC 6901 JSON Pointers) wouldn’t hurt, but we don’t want to expand that too much.

Please be bold [1], and send in your PR!

Grüße, Carsten

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email