Re: [Jsonpath] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp-07: (with COMMENT)

["Murray S. Kucherawy" <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 12:07 PM Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Without the benefit of the WG discussion, it isn’t clear to me how this
> > document is in scope for the current charter of the WG (-01).  The
> milestone
> > for developing this general-purpose regular expression subset was added
> after
> > charter approval.  I’m assuming discussion has occurred to rationalize
> this as
> > a dependency “develop a standards-track JSONPath specification that is
> > technically sound and complete, based on the common semantics and other
> aspects
> > of existing implementations.”
>
> The goal of JSONPath is to define a subset of what’s out there that would
> have a maximum chance of working interoperable.  Apparently, regexp filters
> are quite popular in many JSONPath implementations, so we wanted to include
> them in JSONPath.  The problem was, we couldn’t find a stable specification
> for an interoperable regexp subset. So our choice was to write all this
> into the JSONPath spec or break it out into an independent document.  We
> noticed that lots of other IETF (and non-IETF) work uses regexps, so it
> seemed like a pretty straightforward argument for creating a separate draft
> that JSONPath could depend on, but did not itself depend on JSONPath.
>

Just for the record, it's my fault for neglecting to tell the IESG that
splitting this out of JSONPATH itself was discussed and approved, I believe
with Francesca, before it got to IESG Evaluation.  Apologies for the
oversight.

-MSK