Re: [vwrap] ECMA-262 and the Real LLSD type

* i think we got the textual values from XDR.
* yes, i chuckled a bit at the thought of embedding my linden name in
a standard.
--
meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
@OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * OhMeadhbh@gmail.com


On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Joshua Bell <josh@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> ("from the floor")
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Hurliman, John <john.hurliman@intel.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> In draft-hamrick-llsd-00 "3.2. JSON Serialization" it states:
>>
> (snip)
>
>>
>> Does this mean that an LLSD real type with a value of -Infinity needs to
>> be converted to a JSON string, and would be decoded on the receiving side as
>> an LLSD string with value "-Infinity" (that happens to have a valid
>> conversion to an LLSD real)? ECMA-262 does not support Infinity, NaN, etc.
>> for the JSON 'number' type so it looks like we need to transmit those values
>> as strings.
>
> That looks like a reasonable interpretation/suggestion to me.
> While we're nitpicking this part of the spec:
> * The ABNF for non-special real numbers is pretty b0rked if I'm reading it
> correctly. (The exponent is non-optional, negative numbers are not
> productions, '0.00' is forbidden, etc) I've mentioned this to Mark Lentczner
> off-list.
> * are '+Zero' and '-Zero' really preferable over '0.0' and '-0.0' ? Who uses
> them?
> * should 'Infinity' (sans-+) be considered valid? how about 'NaN' (no 'S' or
> 'Q')?
> * was this all just a conspiracy by the draft authors to get us talking
> about their alter egos?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> vwrap@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>
>