From nobody Mon May 8 09:02:32 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EBE129477 for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:02:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=outer-planes-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Yp2aILXEtGZk for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22d.google.com (mail-oi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22d]) (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 ED467127F0E for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:02:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id h4so55778234oib.3 for ; Mon, 08 May 2017 09:02:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outer-planes-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=4+TZC0NlYkqcG6nlyvx2c++kuZyal/2ntMN6U9iARAw=; b=pRPz5+knv1w98IeSsHjGTc9sHaAqwZr8KwHhvRZgFXAixU6ucSfOwPFYgEmd97R+SC LWGtBUrkZuicsC8mSTvaheBOBbawFPpdp46feNN/whWS8/0dtkjRYwCkS05xillJsTNc JndaRiBAz6haf6RAQdEM9QGoRrrNvsv8Cp6mAq6F6GhF9r8YihYfW6dPuboshg7J9M/u O9aQR/7jPw7q1vNzHmKpHdXqdsPup5pyrok/Pi7l7pRqb5nrtn3lKv7aJMI9cYJ3jjgf m6z41zOow4+vaBnnOurLbgrOHVEEbSdjcMkb5XcpNwKvp4KiCQoGE9dRimUsUv0Ikrb3 vGTA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=4+TZC0NlYkqcG6nlyvx2c++kuZyal/2ntMN6U9iARAw=; b=HiGdmkyOc9s9SfMITKjhty8VA1EqNwIa+13dybzrJP/UPAoKhCbGiIOtOdoBK70rii e+Fj9vH4O0XaJEjBPn1UuX8Wd716td40jLRtlLDj+Cy0OuOxfB3i7fatovUn6CA18DVG JUNxs/SCptyILtwtAV9czHz+Fc7QQbmbQYH3eXBKYu9wWgNbr9gWUyMTG61YIQADkuB1 /3Ga3+n7jjEngrXxlu37fqQ1VunM4jCPLdVzydUQjsXVTha4JRjJUDFeGEzLDNUY7mM4 Zl9LwFQbgwzs2lh/ya5Ivjseq/aPSq8KUEDrIhHtp3+COiT1EznEis5Sq2hL9BjpKDU8 h2/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6mxN7obLtmUTevAuIZMXr2BpzKzDUlrgvAqga8EOX2WOW90EgY lc/3iyTb3Ncs6wU5FmY= X-Received: by 10.202.199.79 with SMTP id x76mr12476641oif.185.1494259349329; Mon, 08 May 2017 09:02:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.6.23.170] ([128.177.113.102]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s23sm6777810ota.56.2017.05.08.09.02.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 May 2017 09:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Matthew Miller To: "json@ietf.org" References: <14252631-AD76-4537-89BF-6368F4A8CDF4@att.com> <7e6af21f-16ea-a3bc-9c01-595ae8acebba@gmx.de> <05100401-88D4-4158-A3FF-3EF144D85449@att.com> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> Cc: Pete Cordell From: "Matthew A. Miller" Message-ID: <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 10:02:32 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:53.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/53.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fXI6nVCfRjNt0oTG63CgXB72cVDILFjNG" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 16:02:31 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --fXI6nVCfRjNt0oTG63CgXB72cVDILFjNG Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="lmGF15rqt59I38iEpIvMJ4Q4HWbOXANr9"; protected-headers="v1" From: "Matthew A. Miller" To: "json@ietf.org" Cc: Pete Cordell Message-ID: <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" References: <14252631-AD76-4537-89BF-6368F4A8CDF4@att.com> <7e6af21f-16ea-a3bc-9c01-595ae8acebba@gmx.de> <05100401-88D4-4158-A3FF-3EF144D85449@att.com> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> In-Reply-To: --lmGF15rqt59I38iEpIvMJ4Q4HWbOXANr9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Any other comments from the Working Group? All things being on the table, is mandating UTF-8 an acceptable outcome? Is Pete's suggestion adequate? I suspect not as it's very similar to earlier text that was rejected, but confirmation would be helpful. - m&m Matthew A. Miller On 4/28/17 8:23 AM, Pete Cordell wrote: > Thanks. I agree with your summary. >=20 > If you removed the sentence which mentions "UTF-16, or UTF-32" from the= > text that you proposed on 17 April, I'd be happy with that text. >=20 > Thanks again, >=20 > Pete. >=20 > On 27/04/2017 17:21, Matthew A. Miller wrote: >> I see consensus for text in Section 8.1 pending an Appendix on encodin= g >> detection, but nothing for the Appendix itself. >> >> Looking deeper in the threads again, it appears to me that: >> >> * There is consensus to say "just use UTF8" in many (most) scenarios >> * There is rough consensus to say "always use UTF8", but concern this >> change goes beyond the charter >> * There is no consensus on a detection algorithm >> >> While the charter calls for "absolute minimal changes", it calls out R= FC >> 7159 (and its -bis) as documenting "interoperability concerns when >> exchanging JSON over a network". Documenting this interoperability is= >> one of its primary goals. >> >> Therefore, the argument is made that a change to the effect of "JSON >> text MUST be encoded as UTF-8" is considered an "absolute minimum >> change" in order to achieve the goal of network interoperability. >> >> To the working group: >> >> * Is there strong objection to mandating only UTF-8? >> * Does anyone have suggested text to that effect? >> >> >> - m&m >> >> Matthew A. Miller >> JSONbis Chair --lmGF15rqt59I38iEpIvMJ4Q4HWbOXANr9-- --fXI6nVCfRjNt0oTG63CgXB72cVDILFjNG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZEJaYAAoJEOz0ck4QngW7LMIH/2xdTPRZRqf+FGNeuZL8KX3i Jc+aGF+cjW2A1AchGro5qwEu1lUXdaAajTWhqzEu1BFaXxLmlM4rtFADYdQaQlW+ 8SyIj+rG1zaGUOYNAuINd2VniyPf37hHOpfkVf4teUe/TkQkPF43M9yRsM17e7IH uzTNtnLZ34SRrJm+9J9M0vUn3V8G2OO2Fzx2Z92Fm0BtyZnE6CHFvEFhLGdHJCJl UWt2JrzPSnZL5Inew6NHJiLq6XGfGROKnM9NLPEunFOmtI5I3KmUhPhylIn/cFoa VxpQIYd968IXrcrcM8QNBWzBf2gUgRslYeC3920oW+sZsrkstv4gxjeNbXr9+Z8= =E8wa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fXI6nVCfRjNt0oTG63CgXB72cVDILFjNG-- From nobody Mon May 8 09:37:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31EC91294FA for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:37:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-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 v8lLoQMpBLGL for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:37:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (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 CB0821294F7 for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.76.36]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LhwLy-1dlnBo1oaw-00nCt9; Mon, 08 May 2017 18:37:30 +0200 To: "Matthew A. Miller" , "json@ietf.org" References: <14252631-AD76-4537-89BF-6368F4A8CDF4@att.com> <7e6af21f-16ea-a3bc-9c01-595ae8acebba@gmx.de> <05100401-88D4-4158-A3FF-3EF144D85449@att.com> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Cc: Pete Cordell From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 18:37:30 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:W93McLBGQ0oNJfD/wOjxYV7HN493NF8dzUgEQ2pe2cP+1vXiEdZ J5kD+JMjl9p2isUh3UC8bv68m9gCJHPWV/AJUMtOCe+4T2/mjx1lpA6knJTMD2I9utXywrw 2IV6kZRN0BGHT1lOG7v4bGBo3uaEub5jOXO8gfLz9tqkz+yyMOX1TVAS2xnQyyUQz1q1DZq BS3XJc6e5NsyfDcAjsg3g== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:3+TT5y0qSZM=:ANJ2WhgKvR1GN0zAWEh83S 9JhnkY/Tf04+7T7iUt5rwfwYZDsUeBgeDyUHKJMXLKmJ6BLwYU6XphSiivwN2OWx1cbdE8+y3 EiumpbmvV4q9Oi3Pu/c4GNGm8GYjhY3oJ7NSlRG+UMBcZbHu76dYz3qcbjj+zNfUIgG1sGmKn cM1Isf681YJnjuy5uITcIEggWi2HtisvG0bfGahuCYLtve4Faze6VN4IekpOib9whnMPBXxKc 0qGX0Q54K/5YTC3XatMiO1jSE+nTszd/mDcSXb83eI9LUgPcHfKdSAlvxiaBMlMgIlpobkVkQ Qzh6Z6aZP3d2/+Rlo0m1sVZvVdGdOazfJIbyvpZbZOxJxccJqs/3TXqUpygyAHt/DxcSil3U/ 02vw0vDAUk8vUpT/Q8PAQv/kw0ynSkI9/oq6jBKgePR/wHvhmDVZkhn3A9j0Tzl0QkPhkcSxA kqkTY6trjiTDyqNYqepgYEzoQ3nHe0Il7zEbyzR8J5SduqsDEu16MshuqVwcTPhY8dWZyhjOg H0Lt8raai0RUMbrlJ3SBTkBRQLAFsMiwfWfMmRftqSOlSKno06SxAflojEx58j2YGTvdg6aWI kpEktGhIMW3RU7P8NXEpxII1BhIx3FZSZzPF+bxgycGICPK9mTZiQTAlqgEFQ+iIQbyIbjsNu sufs8zETJGK1WfXd7iQBnvOMDQ8dAlwW9nEUgh82y7Z8tpn1WX0dQ3UuZYSqB58XE33TfYlyt +vYHICOIOpZjZ6XiQofj5WEDLz1Ifau7gj8/+zMUF90qSBhDzmgwdSmlHBv6hUSDwJTb5NrUx bd9PdXB Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 16:37:35 -0000 On 2017-05-08 18:02, Matthew A. Miller wrote: > Any other comments from the Working Group? All things being on the > table, is mandating UTF-8 an acceptable outcome? > > Is Pete's suggestion adequate? I suspect not as it's very similar to > earlier text that was rejected, but confirmation would be helpful. > > > - m&m > > Matthew A. Miller Here's a question that might be relevant wrt what we say in Section 8. Is "JSON text" the same thing as what can be labelled "application/json"? Is "our" spec (as opposed to ECMA's) solely about what gets transferred as "application/json", or does it define more? Best regards, Julian From nobody Mon May 8 09:44:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31AE128D44 for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:44:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-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 oI_1MT32TwBZ for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (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 3DC2C1241FC for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 09:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.76.36]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MEWkb-1dEdY10VmT-00FftC for ; Mon, 08 May 2017 18:44:48 +0200 To: "json@ietf.org" From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 18:44:47 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:yHdWfAdEDe6zs54HytUFdRKfZmyVYbtzdYIgys7H3vyce12csSQ zYnybuAnpnuhwr7q2Zo4AD6PTWes04ScPTPM86tsHCYofVbrFwk8MYm9VnxxGTVSk5RhYVz Meb6AJxi0j0RjKSJjiorAP0hOlqcynfFRiSshNdsB+wIBfxzo7SG/bgYue5QI44ls7Fbpi4 Z2uwS70Q1iWoqMTz0CGKg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:YoqazImmu2Q=:mUfIGumKRbKx3Mtdhf8MbL 4tOra0ZaT39dx7uBPqZ/ySE7L0JorbfGCKjp7NB49GrHwG4ZMuewtHEGYq3fvgh/YJ3g3P5Ki SlSGw9jFXbSZG5Zw6w3rfokE4kxKiV9G58svxXxm0tXxzBqnygMy/D8umie9m7pBX6t3Yd2LG yZwQ+zF8qk2gD6kThy5DCRWwsHlsyzqABJrs283PT4no+fyYEceaISF0oLf7OcOSxcX4EgdN5 ZxABakTuff8EiOgFbp57YHsQxJbyHbw+qlS6i/IUkSHfhZl3D7VAftGf4sWGLXPzF74vMJEcS qk79G5GRY58PpZISQjU7klIv6lzBDRjQ1aXeQt4JahEdM6TJSdWj8mnR4G3aLNJg09e6XwUzC mrvulNcXZ1X0e20AJxs6WXIPXBH2yaE0tacYXtMBRIHB2wZyu/EVYXCVKLIwDyUw1hIUcZV8E rA3phk5d292GXDrVJdeQ0RIJMmCm6/PH+UimPfAk/pSXZ6oickGk9EScmFlH8D7A755MzNRu8 4sBc+fVqwd/22KiivBvqQGjPmNpoZnO840RikP2SByxpgydN2gLG6sgVttMLys0IKnlZ3PX8E bx5RwHivDjBX9xeNdQZEON86Yiwlisk5gaFlVCgMCVxDe8vsYVGjoW9Fs1o+r82V2qLyEN2Mq QNPIkkyMTo5WOQY1lx0T0Xn6vsJjcDsCtpqTsxXjcyy+2LxK5bscZtn8b7XD1eGlEP7pymGR8 +4pkgwJdLAtcniqe7R6G3NmWxXNT06/fmC6lPuLLaDfLhi50+OT/x2fdDfX1F05aYB3/anUf/ iFqjFRX Archived-At: Subject: [Json] updates/obsoletes X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 16:44:51 -0000 I'm pretty sure I mentioned this before, but in case I didn't...: > Obsoletes: 4627, 7158, 7159 (if approved) February 19, 2017 This should just list RFC 7159 (which already obsoletes the two others). > 1.2. Specifications of JSON > > This document updates [RFC4627], which describes JSON and registers > the media type "application/json". ...which is confusing as in IETF speak, "updating" is different from "obsoleting", and it's also not clear why we mention RFC 4627 here (already been obsoleted by 7159). Best regards, Julian From nobody Wed May 10 05:53:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5949128CFF for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 05:53:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.78 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.78 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 5AJiK4nicM08 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 05:53:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppsa-online.com (lvps217-199-162-192.vps.webfusion.co.uk [217.199.162.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9205128BA2 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 05:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26577 invoked from network); 10 May 2017 13:46:05 +0100 Received: from host109-156-38-129.range109-156.btcentralplus.com (HELO ?192.168.1.72?) (109.156.38.129) by lvps217-199-162-217.vps.webfusion.co.uk with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 10 May 2017 13:46:05 +0100 To: Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" References: <7e6af21f-16ea-a3bc-9c01-595ae8acebba@gmx.de> <05100401-88D4-4158-A3FF-3EF144D85449@att.com> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Cc: Matthew Miller From: Pete Cordell Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 13:53:47 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 12:53:52 -0000 On 08/05/2017 17:37, Julian Reschke wrote: > Here's a question that might be relevant wrt what we say in Section 8. > > Is "JSON text" the same thing as what can be labelled > "application/json"? Is "our" spec (as opposed to ECMA's) solely about > what gets transferred as "application/json", or does it define more? What would your input be for each of those two options? (I know what mine would be.) Cheers, Pete. From nobody Wed May 10 06:08:45 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3901F1201FA for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-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 TXEapEm6mUfX for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 06:08:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (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 788E6126DFB for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 06:08:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.34] ([217.91.35.233]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Ld3t6-1dqboM0kvQ-00iCC8; Wed, 10 May 2017 15:08:38 +0200 To: Pete Cordell , "json@ietf.org" References: <05100401-88D4-4158-A3FF-3EF144D85449@att.com> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Cc: Matthew Miller From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:08:39 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:1IkzpjIzs5yNAj+AMMbS301q3iC656FYRNEGO2aUSEPXbZnggBS xqmzXgM5eEqPV+f2G5O3hxWmeQ7ySOrtwjW4fgB9mQ8qkQyAiTYVOVNFr+b//e2Cj7KvVvY quY94fyKTwxnIo60Lwjs3aK4z4sHeRsTgsLaTuD2cz6UdtSpjazE7hCUOgQ2vgA7ZFcq9VZ 3N1ezju+8Y8+C62cDFwLg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:SAh5L9vGlns=:miKZkDKPyHTLAwC5qoCzbW 2rn1GRTLvIPG2eTi9Sjre0SuSncEUUnesTl4ipNDXaC+GSKvAm6PbYHkhDH9CLODpgSf5t3rj xl+QMJKnXCfural8dUfAyN8O52225r8qbQ2UVAcIVluMZm44xVUSgai9K7t2ydihToisN721b 4BGjq5HtqnvJhMydR/2S902zxCa4m7TKhT+EC/c8AY1SBp2SA/mwVWoFcgU0Z/XH+uaBavFwh gZWDMu6vbwF+t1aXEHUqYqfXyngjZjkAS1UUNUTiTkvhLH4l//cTJUqQzrmNkP7nA37Ay0Agc 8GmQ7eB9XUpeFicH+jQvyy33mAukDZ4UlpuVe9Khy5BzZ/h1Y9AJ8WeQfhDPg2sjFheT4rsw/ rMgKj9Cxk9cZmjuF9UcbuCuzBJSuvEeeia25hxZRM0GGp4ShWjLFFAaSnHxTW9a7usj6i2Y3A aMVoiBCWnwtHNYlFVKq3Q1G4CNKAz25CrdGKvRV7FkAq8DwLGlFLgwdf6u6rxpR8lRgk+Jdxi b9HcylccJGv0J3x9S1coCB8u5ixr7RwrnhhMElLluFY7GHuQDMTI9EDR5pRsKVm4HK8zKARyZ 028+f8D/6hhnNja9KpGs+YoaMhgAJQ4gwPZreTb132o340wI2BBbvcoBktJoNhYm5LRQFsg7r 98rbo3qiv8ZZ5dQh/IIHM7u/Wdb7rqamW8PEV01t4sFF/TxlyT8/HUw2E1m3QbwhLCtcDpY+V eTNsk+qgFexsINaFolJ6Yl4HiTl6gU3CLaZQAGil75bDrzCJs2krD+XDojuokgxcI/9y7Hcyv 7dmE5Bx Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 13:08:43 -0000 On 2017-05-10 14:53, Pete Cordell wrote: > On 08/05/2017 17:37, Julian Reschke wrote: >> Here's a question that might be relevant wrt what we say in Section 8. >> >> Is "JSON text" the same thing as what can be labelled >> "application/json"? Is "our" spec (as opposed to ECMA's) solely about >> what gets transferred as "application/json", or does it define more? > > What would your input be for each of those two options? (I know what > mine would be.) I believe we should have separate names for JSON represented as a sequence of characters (such as in a string variable in a programming language) and for a JSON-shaped octet sequence inside a "application/json"-typed (HTTP) message. For the latter, enforcing UTF-8 IMHO is attractive. I think it's ok for the spec to talk about both, but it really needs to be clear what we are talking about in each section. Best regards, Julian From nobody Wed May 10 06:38:34 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5865129464 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 06:38:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 u0s_eIuLb21i for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 06:38:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0786212944E for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 06:38:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v4ADcQ9t027509; Wed, 10 May 2017 15:38:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from client-0144.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0144.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3wNHPZ0n6lzDJ9K; Wed, 10 May 2017 15:38:26 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:38:25 +0200 Cc: Pete Cordell , "json@ietf.org" , Matthew Miller X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 516116304.977103-3602426bd636d88d64f15c12cac5ebba Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <31BE9775-1808-45CB-9BA2-3EE4D34E5B26@tzi.org> References: <05100401-88D4-4158-A3FF-3EF144D85449@att.com> <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 13:38:33 -0000 On May 10, 2017, at 15:08, Julian Reschke wrote: >=20 > I believe we should have separate names for JSON represented as a = sequence of characters (such as in a string variable in a programming = language) and for a JSON-shaped octet sequence inside a = "application/json"-typed (HTTP) message. For the latter, enforcing UTF-8 = IMHO is attractive. Do we do this a lot for other media types? (Just wondering whether there are good parallels to draw.) Ceterum censeo: the really interesting third level that we should be = talking about is the (generic) data model. (But that is not possible for this round of making the specification = into Internet Standard.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Wed May 10 07:04:32 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9328B129B50 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 07:04:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.78 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.78 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 haPYqxHorrfh for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 07:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppsa-online.com (lvps217-199-162-192.vps.webfusion.co.uk [217.199.162.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A901129B45 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 07:04:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 29344 invoked from network); 10 May 2017 14:56:45 +0100 Received: from host109-156-38-129.range109-156.btcentralplus.com (HELO ?192.168.1.72?) (109.156.38.129) by lvps217-199-162-217.vps.webfusion.co.uk with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 10 May 2017 14:56:45 +0100 To: Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" References: <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> Cc: Matthew Miller From: Pete Cordell Message-ID: <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:04:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 14:04:31 -0000 On 10/05/2017 14:08, Julian Reschke wrote: > I believe we should have separate names for JSON represented as a > sequence of characters (such as in a string variable in a programming > language) and for a JSON-shaped octet sequence inside a > "application/json"-typed (HTTP) message. For the latter, enforcing UTF-8 > IMHO is attractive. > > I think it's ok for the spec to talk about both, but it really needs to > be clear what we are talking about in each section. It's an interesting thought on JSON in programs. It would be strange to be able to say it was not valid JSON if it was encoded in a string inside a Shift-JIS encoded Ruby program for example. My ISO layers are rusty, but it looks like we can talk about JSON character sequences somewhere above the transport layer, and JSON encoded messages somewhere below the transport layer. The latter possibly being transport specific. To me it would seem discussion of "JSON" (without any further refinement) ought to be independent of the lower layer transport encoding aspects. "application/json" would be one transport specific encoding (for which I think most are happy with only UTF-8). JSON inside a Shift-JIS encoded Ruby program is in effect another form of transport for a JSON message. Cheers, Pete. From nobody Wed May 10 10:13:12 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557E312948B for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=outer-planes-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 4S6x3C_qFOKj for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x244.google.com (mail-io0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::244]) (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 7B1D3127275 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x244.google.com with SMTP id m4so752988ioe.0 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outer-planes-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=62de5DQDulr+lhrcTM9QHgznNXfRGI+4gIL0+GSYxx4=; b=I6OJthYDBgBZ4TnAujVHbYDmSjJuelwFEFEEQbf8BxfeXS2TpSAHWKO3n0WZpTt6eJ uN5mOcJ/bR01ktzsjbcB3bQ7IGAzkVJAEO2WhdlJgcYgI3KC3rKVC0uX2D9iiR1O8DQR eMZvGXwWcQIl5sTrgKcJTgAMlHANv8agWEO5MHPdGZtl5jDsI6OlM5kCMIabs2xPnxFO mzu9RfxBbp+qaxnxnQU1042SzJ/UnzjOjbbqqCWDaeQn81+CJOcuWnmvaTefgv8Dzah1 s/v4nyBY0p8E6BY7oO3wnB/Hwytgj2VWJwcczas25m2yik4Ra+/7jx6vxQ2KkbTBHh+d Xs0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=62de5DQDulr+lhrcTM9QHgznNXfRGI+4gIL0+GSYxx4=; b=ECt6HwK654qNob60OG9zBaywo4+9JeOQvepwt73GRWTYAG4cm4/tMP/h+LOa1p/9BL qonU3NRGt6zGoZMro9jzKISddtpPNxQksi3JiFv4MAiaDZAEib1pISkoCPWu0BHy2lI2 ASCbfIm8/9+fxFtfhTWb1qGeTfgZMi4y+f/EWw3pr5yz8coRqay8YsscxSHXPrzxldZL AlYkCKGpSWKoZg421XB3wu5ahQ7vpf6xOx7hao+QlgY0j8+lEeqc9hL8hkJvfTlB2Cj9 nK8JQdLo4yrMMNfQ09vfynKHBx/UDhZ/GAmn+4N1PR0ohlcke+VY1TcQWbukqC7aE85E //Iw== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcD77iorvdZDfCb+VcUMOyOwJlyvL0/KeuFfCaFOVPF68DFVA+wX l973P3BBRr4gDw== X-Received: by 10.107.57.198 with SMTP id g189mr4304904ioa.123.1494436388688; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.29.239] (c-73-217-32-196.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [73.217.32.196]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h142sm1888064ith.31.2017.05.10.10.13.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:07 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Matthew Miller To: Pete Cordell , Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" References: <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> From: "Matthew A. Miller" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:13:06 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:53.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/53.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QqjApumpEovQe0FCdGwlDUDuAj7OcM16T" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 17:13:11 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --QqjApumpEovQe0FCdGwlDUDuAj7OcM16T Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="AT3njQWAmgFk797j6omIcj6RbbRwmhqRd"; protected-headers="v1" From: "Matthew A. Miller" To: Pete Cordell , Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" References: <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> In-Reply-To: <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> --AT3njQWAmgFk797j6omIcj6RbbRwmhqRd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 5/10/17 8:04 AM, Pete Cordell wrote: > On 10/05/2017 14:08, Julian Reschke wrote: >> I believe we should have separate names for JSON represented as a >> sequence of characters (such as in a string variable in a programming >> language) and for a JSON-shaped octet sequence inside a >> "application/json"-typed (HTTP) message. For the latter, enforcing UTF= -8 >> IMHO is attractive. >> >> I think it's ok for the spec to talk about both, but it really needs t= o >> be clear what we are talking about in each section. >=20 > It's an interesting thought on JSON in programs. It would be strange t= o > be able to say it was not valid JSON if it was encoded in a string > inside a Shift-JIS encoded Ruby program for example. >=20 > My ISO layers are rusty, but it looks like we can talk about JSON > character sequences somewhere above the transport layer, and JSON > encoded messages somewhere below the transport layer. The latter > possibly being transport specific. >=20 > To me it would seem discussion of "JSON" (without any further > refinement) ought to be independent of the lower layer transport > encoding aspects. >=20 > "application/json" would be one transport specific encoding (for which = I > think most are happy with only UTF-8). JSON inside a Shift-JIS encoded= > Ruby program is in effect another form of transport for a JSON message.= >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Pete. >=20 I believe in essence it is within our purview to set expectations of what transits a wire protocol. That phrasing is broad and likely vague. To get a more specific, I believe it is within scope to cover instances where a media type is specified and that media type is "application/json" (e.g. HTTP bodies), but I think it is also within scope for this document to essentially say "where a protocol says 'use JSON here' then it is encoded as". I don't believe it is within scope to dictate JSON be encoded in any particular manner when placed into a storage medium, or when embedded within other content (e.g., the Shift-JIS encoded Ruby program even if said program were transmitted over a network protocol). Assuming the Working Group finds that scope acceptable and finds UTF-8 only acceptable, here is a starting proposal for text: """ 8.1. Character Encoding When transmitting over a network protocol, JSON text MUST be encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]). Previous specifications of JSON have not required the use of UTF-8 when transmitting JSON text. However, the vast majority of JSON-based software implementations have chosen to use the UTF-8 encoding, to the extent that it is the only encoding that achieves interoperability. Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark (U+FEFF) to the beginning of a JSON text. In the interests of interoperability, implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a byte order mark rather than treating it as an error. """ If you find this acceptable, please indicate that. Otherwise, please provide suggested changes. - m&m Matthew A. Miller --AT3njQWAmgFk797j6omIcj6RbbRwmhqRd-- --QqjApumpEovQe0FCdGwlDUDuAj7OcM16T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZE0oiAAoJEOz0ck4QngW730wIAIewuj9JN+MMPNBFUmUpOo++ UOORUkIO3GnmKoRLj2aJo0bsabeIjQ2P5t6+3l6UlY94tVALhELavlzdGNHkW4Sf /Qd2Gtsn5Do/sc5Jgu6FhIkgQXUo2Of86JJCBWM7zeEve3d9RFRFsbumbgfAAN+e F9HBf9F/mUrbGSbXnrYxIAC100QGj3VbaHPaZ4L9EpKRrjmKfAMHuJgwkxPFRuyF rEiwFsTS8D/CUsCR+07yWg/qh/hfbA7EoKwzv2jeqVOUlW1XLH5LbAfaaOpGN5bz 3OjpmcM4rZKrpDYWhxMuAsJ/ab+UCDMVS+RbzWCHhlpoKXA+FfUv8C4gv3Rp1GE= =oAat -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QqjApumpEovQe0FCdGwlDUDuAj7OcM16T-- From nobody Wed May 10 10:42:57 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0752129B37 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=cursive.net 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 eH-dmZ4_J2eX for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::232]) (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 B55961286B2 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id l14so1504684ywk.1 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cursive.net; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DOk9w5Sf6EGE9D6d8xpJK24ep7k55wQGz714/RV21Kk=; b=SVN0soZaFQUYAr2vfon4t1je689wRdj9Vso6vRzRxjaSUBwLrw44J+J1uoGGIFyPX6 WVhOMJvaK8TQIztY9Bxl9f0mPzb2lLD9fV+uKQwS5rd5ac0BE+eqaIKF4nvMJTqLHgV/ B8dRulQ73OsrBj2wacW/VZU1sQ+cKhK1xUeXs= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DOk9w5Sf6EGE9D6d8xpJK24ep7k55wQGz714/RV21Kk=; b=sSxOH5FzbYPkOwaqD47+ve/cycG9q26hHmsjFFzu1PbVPtve68YsbAwoFKf0j64Pb8 4AjHYe+A4+PHUKqa1iO9cODpctLmexs7nYjAGoaIp932rFFFEuTsUiF70Z8in2PuN/Yd dB0X6KL94c1Mxuym43lw5vkZWkyBoUzC9K6Mpz2ZMxODncrjEBBpz2Nw//BXlkxJ0XUp cr021nFIL8TKCqKM9DFsSHZc5avGmJjwNd3Dc7+77hIcUKnIdZpxRKK1s54AzVeRMcZA 9j+ha8gKeXqIHJkLjv/mjxGuSsT55M8AgQ8AjsKBRgJPpi0vbsPd89WwXEaLWGEO8Rfb UNSA== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDv6q7jEyyBOqgTD0jWgMCpl9OxzlObKZiUmqadTJBoFVgON0Pu 6XSoVgRXd2Fr6LfW7Wc= X-Received: by 10.13.211.134 with SMTP id v128mr5766065ywd.110.1494438172944; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.6.21.8] ([128.177.113.102]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d136sm1727013ywh.75.2017.05.10.10.42.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 May 2017 10:42:52 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Joe Hildebrand In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:42:50 -0600 Cc: Pete Cordell , Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <12DDC578-D7A3-4B30-926B-CEBC3F805BE9@cursive.net> References: <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> To: "Matthew A. Miller" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 17:42:55 -0000 > On May 10, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Matthew A. Miller = wrote: >=20 > """ > 8.1. Character Encoding >=20 > When transmitting over a network protocol, JSON text MUST be > encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]). >=20 > Previous specifications of JSON have not required the use of UTF-8 > when transmitting JSON text. However, the vast majority of > JSON-based software implementations have chosen to use the UTF-8 > encoding, to the extent that it is the only encoding that achieves > interoperability. >=20 > Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark (U+FEFF) to the > beginning of a JSON text. =20 Suggestion: change "JSON text" here to "network-transmitted JSON text" Rationale: it's not clear that this restriction applies to the JSON = described up 2 paragraphs. > In the interests of interoperability, > implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a > byte order mark rather than treating it as an error. > """ >=20 > If you find this acceptable, please indicate that. Otherwise, please > provide suggested changes. Other than my nit, +1 =E2=80=94=20 Joe Hildebrand From nobody Wed May 10 12:05:41 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B35E128768 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 12:05:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.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 pZZdjSgqhOQb for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 12:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x232.google.com (mail-wm0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::232]) (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 219931267BB for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 12:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x232.google.com with SMTP id u65so14810043wmu.1 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 12:05:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=DryKxN2lOOez2xXWDHTz8b+R7epGBAhttInkCqmaZPo=; b=CoeFtHCY+qAiWzphemdN5cToy+80i3Ol3rRjO3fqtSt17E3kwAgOnYWdJWsXs55ZFg 6lF+QK5L2KpcvOXrY42QR0D/RD1FrkRbXJ6uHFbeGxA1C2BHrdCYrQE+1O/7HXICI12s SsXcNXxefDM7u2hf8YQkCfbZXF/aDO8SJasdW5S9gDOoWIx0dKBC78ZSFLcWZKUqsqQO sgB0tkMKiLqpy0Ua/UOMbcZ535rE/eywJKpIlesareOqbNLA4oHzYdUtoj0PIYkOXW9a RAvbcuAwni98L4BBhmE6q+FRUFBwmvZikgaT936OTert2HREDTMxNTgj21sQwPEZEyvg qcvA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DryKxN2lOOez2xXWDHTz8b+R7epGBAhttInkCqmaZPo=; b=ajQv4OvxZYrl/c8UogcoIKJ14xNGfNBuw2RPpqg9M/SGOV9PEyzcH3o5GhdDsdPe+4 043ZUic5Q2MeLfeSnjHJisg2UOCUUWM+4UnkXsprwEEVv4Ru5Ma3Di28IXiNSCs0cy7O O0Y3K1JZaX3v5Jz7QlQ2eILpr9ixBxGSdEJSHan9+B6+BWuZ3R1PIeCgBzxfXBgPU3hq SvfNKdcymZkzdKuDvOZWujWCzpVj5NixdaGxZpZfCsldnG6alioUOC6brYZMvVtdV/vv Mv4uydCs6GzYQlyhQrIP6lgc0Vev1cPQPZfhcRrJE2Upvx0MwMTMkbb1pX83NrUbg/jE ZerQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAxtck3uus7TzV99b0yAKjSjcphOfJxPPE/x2X//dDRZUaQiidU h3FZlKfksUWG9iU4zm/mn8Kb5R/L6inL X-Received: by 10.28.9.204 with SMTP id 195mr3585869wmj.97.1494443137481; Wed, 10 May 2017 12:05:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.172.197 with HTTP; Wed, 10 May 2017 12:05:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1e94516c-9c82-8b0e-0d2d-7dbaa83b21bd@outer-planes.net> <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> From: John Cowan Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:05:16 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Matthew A. Miller" Cc: Pete Cordell , Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114428b058d689054f302880 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 19:05:40 -0000 --001a114428b058d689054f302880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Matthew A. Miller < linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net> wrote: If you find this acceptable, please indicate that. Otherwise, please > provide suggested changes. > Emphatic +1 -- John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org The Imperials are decadent, 300 pound free-range chickens (except they have teeth, arms instead of wings, and dinosaurlike tails). --Elyse Grasso --001a114428b058d689054f302880 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Matthew A. Miller <linuxwol= f+ietf@outer-planes.net> wrote:

If you find th= is acceptable, please indicate that.=C2=A0 Otherwise, please
provide suggested changes.

Emphatic +1

--=C2=A0
=
John Cowan =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://v= rici.lojban.org/~cowan =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0cowan@ccil.org
The Imperia= ls are decadent, 300 pound free-range chickens (except they have
teeth, arms instead of wings, and dinosaurlike tails)= . =C2=A0--Elyse Grasso

--001a114428b058d689054f302880-- From nobody Wed May 10 13:30:40 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F95C128799 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 13:30:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.979 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 J3RtmJM4WcCO for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 13:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppsa-online.com (lvps217-199-162-192.vps.webfusion.co.uk [217.199.162.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 225BA126B71 for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 13:30:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 13724 invoked from network); 10 May 2017 21:22:53 +0100 Received: from host109-156-38-129.range109-156.btcentralplus.com (HELO ?192.168.1.72?) (109.156.38.129) by lvps217-199-162-217.vps.webfusion.co.uk with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 10 May 2017 21:22:53 +0100 To: "Matthew A. Miller" , Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" References: <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> From: Pete Cordell Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 21:30:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 20:30:39 -0000 On 10/05/2017 18:13, Matthew A. Miller wrote: > Assuming the Working Group finds that scope acceptable and finds UTF-8 > only acceptable, here is a starting proposal for text: > > """ > 8.1. Character Encoding > > When transmitting over a network protocol, JSON text MUST be > encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]). > > Previous specifications of JSON have not required the use of UTF-8 > when transmitting JSON text. However, the vast majority of > JSON-based software implementations have chosen to use the UTF-8 > encoding, to the extent that it is the only encoding that achieves > interoperability. > > Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark (U+FEFF) to the > beginning of a JSON text. In the interests of interoperability, > implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a > byte order mark rather than treating it as an error. > """ > > If you find this acceptable, please indicate that. Otherwise, please > provide suggested changes. A strong +1 to the spirit of the proposal. I realise that the term "network protocol" is necessarily vague, but I wonder if it might be possible to avoid some confusion with the likes of NetBEUI (if that's still around) with a phrasing something like: When transmitted as the syntax of a network protocol, or as a payload of a network protocol intended to be interpreted as part of a protocol, JSON text MUST be encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]). Thanks, Pete From nobody Sat May 13 10:40:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04DD4129566 for ; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:40:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 FyiXtvRa4o2E for ; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:40:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x233.google.com (mail-pf0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::233]) (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 8D6D4129439 for ; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x233.google.com with SMTP id m17so43864999pfg.3 for ; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:37:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=textuality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LU+OJM9fBWZTHWbDDvvgntoeGrbetaBecQ9hCTb+QMU=; b=Y43fjSuW4jbyyHmcvuH0hikulRtaGPi/Eev6PPdt0r2YtCfOOmlDVBqEdCGNm9ygYB jOUnePOKYmxZdKrVEoWCsismJcXUyq5pzIrkNA2o/GIebFfbBTuxTDs71RxmGvFuZRRV FDHF9IHi/LKd4Y3YKB7GsIP7gMxjX5x1x49ODoNZx+IM/SAQ0eB1rGHDIU3bvqivIOt2 mip3gFsZk6CG8VYB7DLboAcLvQtfkk70cHErJPsmCuRDlBmPWYfKfY1F1nXWZ88esLRg dIIM6JGZEZJSD9svwRQpLgiGnV+VIknnl/1qFqDUtIPUFdD6BZYlu5TzIR6pk7etqrkx TF5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LU+OJM9fBWZTHWbDDvvgntoeGrbetaBecQ9hCTb+QMU=; b=blZHhaP0HzvKYA3q27DZQ3+DXu9wAnKXmcYOP+Fx12DCiTnYd+JcMmIB6yzZl/skuo z6QQLua9Tn+Bxz+c1OLQPW8vEd45/Z9Iv08Fu74OBQ2yXdyKvegCLozrTsezilykG1JN XhTAhoA/KGB5HTG3Fa+L/d1XiVU1X13HN5gZgMEIXwwzeHLvvqOXEa8s5nl+5HuJah7F QUQuHMZNt+qj1FDHuouaunFq1gLqubaMZxW5MXc3qye9gAtZHi3HM0czKi6rCs9Kq0GD r1F+LGTbiWGH0naN3I9TlsbVKT/JN1tfdSGXZ/anlmYOMyD7BtT6jKiNeT2M3Fu9S5IL 4djA== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAWsLVDaGRyGC4CGHOtR2K6GJDbdRldbuF87SU6n30FYPYl1NVV 06k8pW4OZNATFwbxKzqffkhoTihctQ== X-Received: by 10.84.214.22 with SMTP id h22mr13739431pli.96.1494697042145; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:37:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.180.132 with HTTP; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:37:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.86.134.32] In-Reply-To: References: <40e3207f-e047-c898-1f0c-4422de1d597a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <1b3ec14a-927a-8d46-e3d3-9807a9588437@outer-planes.net> <20170417175627.GK23461@localhost> <10B651F1-7FE0-484D-BD2E-FD146BC5FB04@tzi.org> <6eb23f90-6623-7888-bc1c-6640a9dababc@codalogic.com> <61bfad2b-850d-a11f-e80b-d5ed9ccb4dc9@codalogic.com> <08a88696-65ef-da05-0d77-1a07d04ebfc8@outer-planes.net> <6f047d01-ad72-59ab-9d34-20a8177ab3af@outer-planes.net> <44b4523a-5e4b-ccad-af96-931d8b9ad1c2@codalogic.com> From: Tim Bray Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 10:37:01 -0700 Message-ID: To: Pete Cordell Cc: "Matthew A. Miller" , Julian Reschke , "json@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045d26643e8bb6054f6b46ad" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] Call for Consensus: Proposed Text for "8.1 Character Encoding" X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 17:40:14 -0000 --f403045d26643e8bb6054f6b46ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =E2=80=8BI=E2=80=99m meh on the network-or-not language. I have one source of heartburn. The stated purpose of 7159bis is to achieve harmony with ECMA 404. That document does *not* constrain JSON encoding. I=E2=80=99m fine with saying that JSON has to be UTF-8, but I t= hink we should consult with ECMA and see if the goal of spec harmonization is still possible if we make the UTF-8 restriction. I=E2=80=99m much more positive about the UTF-8 restriction than the ECMA ha= rmony (which I think is ridiculous political bushwah) but at least the WG should know the context before making a call.=E2=80=8B On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Pete Cordell wrote: > On 10/05/2017 18:13, Matthew A. Miller wrote: > >> Assuming the Working Group finds that scope acceptable and finds UTF-8 >> only acceptable, here is a starting proposal for text: >> >> """ >> 8.1. Character Encoding >> >> When transmitting over a network protocol, JSON text MUST be >> encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]). >> >> Previous specifications of JSON have not required the use of UTF-8 >> when transmitting JSON text. However, the vast majority of >> JSON-based software implementations have chosen to use the UTF-8 >> encoding, to the extent that it is the only encoding that achieves >> interoperability. >> >> Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark (U+FEFF) to the >> beginning of a JSON text. In the interests of interoperability, >> implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a >> byte order mark rather than treating it as an error. >> """ >> >> If you find this acceptable, please indicate that. Otherwise, please >> provide suggested changes. >> > > > A strong +1 to the spirit of the proposal. > > I realise that the term "network protocol" is necessarily vague, but I > wonder if it might be possible to avoid some confusion with the likes of > NetBEUI (if that's still around) with a phrasing something like: > > When transmitted as the syntax of a network protocol, or as a > payload of a network protocol intended to be interpreted as part of > a protocol, JSON text MUST be encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of > [UNICODE]). > > Thanks, > > Pete > > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > --=20 - Tim Bray (If you=E2=80=99d like to send me a private message, see https://keybase.io/timbray) --f403045d26643e8bb6054f6b46ad Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=E2= =80=8BI=E2=80=99m meh on the network-or-not language.

I have one source of heartburn.=C2=A0 The stat= ed purpose of 7159bis is to achieve harmony with ECMA 404.=C2=A0 That docum= ent does *not* constrain JSON encoding.=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m fine =C2=A0with s= aying that JSON has to be UTF-8, but I think we should consult with ECMA an= d see if the goal of spec harmonization is still possible if we make the UT= F-8 restriction.

I=E2=80= =99m much more positive about the UTF-8 restriction than the ECMA harmony (= which I think is ridiculous political bushwah) but at least the WG should k= now the context before making a call.=E2=80=8B

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:30 PM, P= ete Cordell <petejson@codalogic.com> wrote:
On 10/05/2017 18:13, Matthew A. Mil= ler wrote:
Assuming the Working Group finds that scope acceptable and finds UTF-8
only acceptable, here is a starting proposal for text:

"""
8.1.=C2=A0 Character Encoding

When transmitting over a network protocol, JSON text MUST be
encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of [UNICODE]).

Previous specifications of JSON have not required the use of UTF-8
when transmitting JSON text. However, the vast majority of
JSON-based software implementations have chosen to use the UTF-8
encoding, to the extent that it is the only encoding that achieves
interoperability.

Implementations MUST NOT add a byte order mark (U+FEFF) to the
beginning of a JSON text.=C2=A0 In the interests of interoperability,
implementations that parse JSON texts MAY ignore the presence of a
byte order mark rather than treating it as an error.
"""

If you find this acceptable, please indicate that.=C2=A0 Otherwise, please<= br> provide suggested changes.


 A strong +1 to the spirit of the proposal.

I realise that the term "network protocol" is necessarily vague, = but I wonder if it might be possible to avoid some confusion with the likes= of NetBEUI (if that's still around) with a phrasing something like:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 When transmitted as the syntax of a network protocol, or as a=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 payload of a network protocol intended to be interpreted as p= art of
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 a protocol, JSON text MUST be encoded in UTF-8 (Section 3 of<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 [UNICODE]).

Thanks,

Pete


_______________________________________________
json mailing list
json@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json



--
=
- Tim Bray (If you=E2=80=99d like to send me a private messag= e, see https://key= base.io/timbray)
--f403045d26643e8bb6054f6b46ad-- From nobody Thu May 18 09:56:45 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5FE9129B98 for ; Thu, 18 May 2017 09:56:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=filament-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 ce7a8cIXOwSF for ; Thu, 18 May 2017 09:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x235.google.com (mail-it0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::235]) (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 2E29F12EB48 for ; Thu, 18 May 2017 09:50:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x235.google.com with SMTP id a10so20900112itg.1 for ; Thu, 18 May 2017 09:50:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=filament-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:from:subject:cc:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=yzkhS/oU0BK7crDewMjcmjH7JS+p/86JRLlDkRxckXc=; b=qR2/DYugGsGcyD3zsDKtzMUcBXlJLWGwhWqKQAQvuKPe0QcgU+qHG2IjZg+mfoyrD3 I2ulqTlYG9EWNUO9we20R1zdhgrDZbPR4gW8vsm2VgEhsMbOF72jvcofuYfc1e0+29ii cvz0DokjlWFLwffxvCrdk9cQ0ML6104PiVme3DwCif74ciojjUhTQpzPscdx6oud5qUr SCSBlGehOi9GcgaWvjfdEL+RXYWGIE0faoVpE2OqUozeU9ZHOme3RNtXcIigxVi4Mwdp 8zgB55XPLySyzkuhLMA7kYVGOb4aRaZB8Tx7w/CzDgCeoL7uUKNX64N3A4NTvGhZD3f2 r/XA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yzkhS/oU0BK7crDewMjcmjH7JS+p/86JRLlDkRxckXc=; b=F0Veorfo5uL0YwnzhIBdZ+2DHtc5DxSIqS6zjherJFl0RPrjAeGQ7GLWaYFFPoCPGj W27j9bsk0xjJZyDUr6lEYxSTvpV1psldwq/duCyNjz6oZF3SWBzpZ2z7xO2mUyiHWfGS nCAy2XX19wOzx/JsEKZBudRN3L5/HeOwEOQkKnnFOHZWi3jiNZaYPfRvag00RPhhQ0ud I+1tBnKdccWahbFHl1Unfp79fflFPB6j8Fd5/J3wu33Or6953K0iOjcasLo8L4wmeU9T AEh+KBpu1eWLDNlLFnzOEYTb8Teb3vGThqTqquAmc5oaTR6WR0ux1IwfiQBDbJ4OItMT Q4eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCgqcOAcOLtSEfQgmGoC3c7WXMyHXcjwmJAfhEcMQjgVBGYVRbT Phn2fh3qxltxUyPu X-Received: by 10.36.150.193 with SMTP id z184mr5481280itd.89.1495126235557; Thu, 18 May 2017 09:50:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aither.local ([2601:282:4202:67d3:5008:a309:499a:146f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n22sm2670629itg.25.2017.05.18.09.50.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 May 2017 09:50:34 -0700 (PDT) To: cbor@ietf.org, ace@ietf.org, json@ietf.org, jose@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre - Filament Cc: Jeremie Miller Message-ID: Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 10:50:33 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: [Json] FYI: JSON Constrained Notation X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 16:56:28 -0000 [Cross-posted to ACE, CBOR, JOSE, JSON because it might be of interest to folks on all four lists.] Folks here might have an interest in an I-D that Jeremie Miller and I just submitted, defining a set of mapping rules from JSON to CBOR that preserves all semantic information. The intent is to use the JOSE standards (and related work such as OpenID Connect) unmodified in constrained environments. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-miller-json-constrained-notation-00 For now, please send feedback directly to the authors. Thanks! Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://filament.com/ From bnossum@norwia.no Sat May 20 00:03:25 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B928D12943D for ; Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.879 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] 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 ddcTy4Q5mtMN for ; Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.powertech.no (smtp2.powertech.no [195.159.0.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52DD7128C84 for ; Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epost.powertech.no (www2.powertech.no [195.159.42.242]) by smtp2.powertech.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id F16AAF81E7 for ; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:03:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 80.212.78.253 (SquirrelMail authenticated user norwia.bnossum) by epost.powertech.no with HTTP; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:04:09 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <56979.80.212.78.253.1495263849.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 09:04:09 +0200 (CEST) From: bnossum@norwia.no To: json@ietf.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 21 May 2017 07:05:28 -0700 Subject: [Json] JSON files in old-time DOS 8.3 file system, proposed extension "JON". X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 07:29:17 -0000 Dear IETF, In the embedded computing community it is common to use the FAT file system in primitive ways (for space/resource reasons). Hence I need to obey the old-time 8.3 file names. In RFC7159 the file extension of a file containing JSON data is specified to be ".json", obviously one letter to long for my needs. I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file extension ".JON" for old FAT file systems? I realize that this problem will eventually go away, but probably not for a good many years. Best regards, Baard Nossum, +47 92409073 From nobody Sun May 21 08:44:06 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995CD1243FE for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 08:44:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.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 8Be2mYLd0YvA for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 08:44:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (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 E977B120726 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 08:44:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id d127so123499637wmf.0 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 08:44:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wjkhKIxjmB6EA0TO+8UE4AnPp0Ibb4iDy+EgHuOOH7w=; b=Gzu6hqxxb7qUvUsQ4q+WsK9IwAbav2NbJzWgA+amVT/dGI/ArWtquH37PbGjEz0ht7 FIhfS6c3QzFT3wcsQy3xSCs0TyplOLM0s9GEyZPeT63YjnN3x0pSK3RmKp7ttpAwwYuu SdllJyuKtfklQRKTHzalbkCeI+vqw2I/37GHyt+yf81AxREgWLMRvVUFFP1/aQ+Yl9Ra t0dDIoXhRTx9UGmnpUlug428gL+dLxI1PRBYLYKsNXTpyQdVpf40wDSABFUhY4ZgZNG1 DBGZb0P/DSlaJE3a6d6CFORkne+fA94qGJvSdnPkHZYTmQ2ZGYDCng7XxDsqK7syKH8X 7C2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wjkhKIxjmB6EA0TO+8UE4AnPp0Ibb4iDy+EgHuOOH7w=; b=TRsroo1mTnK7YROZ4DcHyCqW7ADD2Th+ddUfYXmFDv8YTroNpWwLhmnQKHqHZpw0Na 2EGT7Y+JXCl0wGo5sqvsbxTn52RPIY/jEdcGQHAxCCALccxMOwyKM7Cj7Od1OY+gZegq YBg0giG+EYUBg2M2itNrwibNTuqtwtnn7Qcjv4IpgLBBvVaX8c5KnvUKTy7Vpoy5geQu /0VX9NCPvCm4TU0JfCHVaNIIuyyeZOvjUfCUkTE3eVP4gQSezXU4O6ADVmywKFYa5nOy Ox7pTHJXUfTj6oIgJArH8b2BFrZaZqSLtBDWPK0QWx/dxuyvBDfWPV0UpC9A+zI1Do7A I2tg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDX2Ku1bzhExPCoIjkug4gzLedItgnzpjCOV+RxEb7wVkfyXmQ9 xuiIrmEFIZBWHUF7JeVhe4sRWAP0nf5donQ= X-Received: by 10.28.98.131 with SMTP id w125mr11892588wmb.74.1495381442384; Sun, 21 May 2017 08:44:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.38.2 with HTTP; Sun, 21 May 2017 08:43:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <56979.80.212.78.253.1495263849.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> References: <56979.80.212.78.253.1495263849.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> From: John Cowan Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 11:43:41 -0400 Message-ID: To: bnossum@norwia.no Cc: json@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a4efaad6be105500a9fa1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] JSON files in old-time DOS 8.3 file system, proposed extension "JON". X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 15:44:06 -0000 --001a114a4efaad6be105500a9fa1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 3:04 AM, wrote: I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file extension ".JON" > for old FAT file systems? I realize that this problem will eventually go > away, but probably not for a good many years. > I think "JSN" would be better because more recognizable (cnsnnts r mr rcgnzbl thn vwels). In OS/8, a good extension would be JN, to avoid collision with JS for JavaScript. -- John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org It was dreary and wearisome. Cold clammy winter still held sway in this forsaken country. The only green was the scum of livid weed on the dark greasy surfaces of the sullen waters. Dead grasses and rotting reeds loomed up in the mists like ragged shadows of long-forgotten summers. --LOTR, "The Passage of the Marshes" --001a114a4efaad6be105500a9fa1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 3:04 AM, <bnossum@norwia.no> wrote:=

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file exten= sion ".JON"
for old FAT file systems?=C2=A0 I realize that this problem will eventually= go
away, but probably not for a good many years.

I think "JSN" would be better because more recognizable = (cnsnnts r mr rcgnzbl thn vwels).=C2=A0 In OS/8, a good extension would be = JN, to avoid collision with JS for JavaScript.

--= =C2=A0
John Cowan =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0cowan@ccil.org
=
It was dreary and wearisome.=C2=A0 Cold clammy winter still held sway = in this
forsaken country.=C2=A0 The only green was the scum of li= vid weed on the dark
greasy surfaces of the sullen waters.=C2=A0 = Dead grasses and rotting reeds loomed
up in the mists like ragged= shadows of long-forgotten summers.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 -= -LOTR, "The Passage of the Marshes"=C2=A0


--001a114a4efaad6be105500a9fa1-- From nobody Sun May 21 09:16:23 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E94127077 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 09:16:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 2EkTNxKjo9qE for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 09:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (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 5AAA2126BF7 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 09:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x229.google.com with SMTP id l18so137329014oig.2 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 09:16:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=B3uwV4u4mA8mk+9sQk6xoRZEyKT1qxhMaEQWSJZBU90=; b=CQmOVOBG+iILt8rvHjadGpU+gFlsd9iRpJdhb/KZaySFc8HTF8pNaj/6M7yxrs0Gas wOydhE4Ax0ULqmxCJVVoCtx9sdszjk2Zrju6rezn3yYTa8htC3r66uQlkKPziBmLACLz xpN6dg1lF9PKhDIoa/MA2C96cxsZZgNFwWeak4AaAB7cn2Hru4LPqvNN8dIvQggyp94J ecE111o5XsfGhScNuA1eYzCXdL7lafkF98tbZFmA89jlW/wFmSJe47SJT11G2qMW8GXE lnwB8rc+j5wnH9CLkMwHPf9mBvGW4wfLeOWdHde98VLw5pWJ1x9UZpWcO2vN1z8KqwOB wk5w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=B3uwV4u4mA8mk+9sQk6xoRZEyKT1qxhMaEQWSJZBU90=; b=XqEOHQ7rEiFuSTV6lhkVS7swH5uR3A2dJAOFmFvIJOSKKqeCsmQO6uscev/x7LVj2/ 6GUAjfrr9T4Ih+nqPDB1p+0Z5RI4zSJPVhbYjVWqF0XTMPDi3KdqyJU6+7X089HTErof T0g0W04og82lAKnARn3bgfTXF6qoIqpyRMyPQixseN2wU5grCsGLNORKbwl/f2C3AWHK DCTHTUEx3mrNK0fg5kLl8C1yPJql8Pn9Z4yM6LZXtCqXybrm8s3BT8K9K/0oli+fsiiT DCzeGaDourDsBtnQ+kNpO5Ct5LIxrkpSuasSNJxH21ss7n8XpIkV4wmB36YebodkYxCm 3BHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcA8mQS/ffZxlqjX4Yk1CrBKIMq7OJekqjnHXsKzzn6gmcTLp1zl 1+8j4TsTAQBism6SLHI8m2SZu26/Cw== X-Received: by 10.202.44.80 with SMTP id s77mr8418350ois.154.1495383379676; Sun, 21 May 2017 09:16:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: hallam@gmail.com Received: by 10.157.17.34 with HTTP; Sun, 21 May 2017 09:16:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <56979.80.212.78.253.1495263849.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 12:16:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: aYbjriUoX3X_jjO-Ji6R0lpj8Ns Message-ID: To: John Cowan Cc: bnossum@norwia.no, JSON WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1137d83e26141705500b13d2" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] JSON files in old-time DOS 8.3 file system, proposed extension "JON". X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 16:16:22 -0000 --001a1137d83e26141705500b13d2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =E2=80=8BIf you are doing retro computing then you shouldn't be using JSON = at all. =E2=80=8B On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM, John Cowan wrote: > > On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 3:04 AM, wrote: > > I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file extension ".JON" >> for old FAT file systems? I realize that this problem will eventually g= o >> away, but probably not for a good many years. >> > > I think "JSN" would be better because more recognizable (cnsnnts r mr > rcgnzbl thn vwels). In OS/8, a good extension would be JN, to avoid > collision with JS for JavaScript. > > -- > John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org > It was dreary and wearisome. Cold clammy winter still held sway in this > forsaken country. The only green was the scum of livid weed on the dark > greasy surfaces of the sullen waters. Dead grasses and rotting reeds > loomed > up in the mists like ragged shadows of long-forgotten summers. > --LOTR, "The Passage of the Marshes" > > > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > > --001a1137d83e26141705500b13d2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=E2= =80=8BIf you are doing retro computing then you shouldn't be using JSON= at all.=C2=A0
=
=E2=80=8B<= /div>

On Sun= , May 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:<= br>

On Sat, May 20, 2017 at = 3:04 AM, <bnossum@norwia.no> wrote:

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify = the file extension ".JON"
for old FAT file systems?=C2=A0 I realize that this problem will eventually= go
away, but probably not for a good many years.

I think "JSN" would be better because more recogn= izable (cnsnnts r mr rcgnzbl thn vwels).=C2=A0 In OS/8, a good extension wo= uld be JN, to avoid collision with JS for JavaScript.

--=C2=A0
John = Cowan =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0cow= an@ccil.org
It was dreary and wearisome.=C2=A0 Cold clammy wi= nter still held sway in this
forsaken country.=C2=A0 The only gre= en was the scum of livid weed on the dark
greasy surfaces of the = sullen waters.=C2=A0 Dead grasses and rotting reeds loomed
up in = the mists like ragged shadows of long-forgotten summers.
=C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 --LOTR, "The Passage of the Marshes"=C2=A0



_______________________________________________
json mailing list
json@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json


--001a1137d83e26141705500b13d2-- From nobody Sun May 21 14:41:54 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DCD9128B37 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 14:41:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 IxylmWdlYK8h for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 14:41:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x231.google.com (mail-oi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::231]) (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 096A412420B for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 14:41:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x231.google.com with SMTP id w10so141654723oif.0 for ; Sun, 21 May 2017 14:41:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=TD/qyVqfHNrt9LOie+9anAO5ed4LtHcGQ2yHG/phEI0=; b=eU4Pym68VP/lyICgtpuWhcBrxG1m8VDzifTRSfrOgvolCwkyqxb4t5f4ekyk6llBQH psBzpX/CGW/LjuarxYzoEcEy6EooyOLLQI9K6wZRlJUD9Zr40QumIdg0IjLIODIb4xeM C0ru1k3gGey2eWZ77hwZiA6riyZkWAbwEX9/+3EabdydTXuYLnyd6G7rhMrYroZL8B/E 15NlybO1RbfusDlh9L2kYdoEENRDVQv5lYdFqakQYAqam2CKgjcB+rb9myx7giEF+Rbj XqRGSg2w5yugldmy/y/FFB0+jNO6eCR+XXr5mD4Ia02JuaQuX0jWQi25LlZrJU25iRvI MHhA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TD/qyVqfHNrt9LOie+9anAO5ed4LtHcGQ2yHG/phEI0=; b=Vi8m6bJNktXb/pw2LTvwpDFUJNDlAa2+A00+jt1nDlw2LdR64KadnWVnvhg0uCC/jt KFN1f0TT3s6r0I4vD1Eno6SSJUmxoLT/CW0lLjLnkqGDoqVoEjYfv6cARLw0TLo3TEJl CkReYcKxWG/2k1/7ZGg/L2dYgPYeLcKwZIQhJlFeQ8YzmEqJO6DmCrwN99sdBCMjuGFJ bHj7hMqpFg4CXffDeEDL6S5WjlgJDDjs3S/pVXMW/NMOSVORrjb05Klq+wFwMz/X0+p6 Kaa6Yiq0n6T/+kKZt/Yr7eAV0Ct/+y75Ix+XXzxOn1T4dwnRFaYkBf4jQujF1t0dLrbG +cvg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDp6asDeQHReZ6bFY7Upr79y0LQvjxXzI8zOkpE+y3nEyBE+OhZ 7sxjW0NkXaUtrwKJaHFsGBtNErrSBg== X-Received: by 10.202.212.205 with SMTP id l196mr10515676oig.4.1495402909313; Sun, 21 May 2017 14:41:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: hallam@gmail.com Received: by 10.157.17.34 with HTTP; Sun, 21 May 2017 14:41:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20669.80.212.78.253.1495399193.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> References: <56979.80.212.78.253.1495263849.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> <20669.80.212.78.253.1495399193.squirrel@epost.powertech.no> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 17:41:48 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nBIJ8pNZieXmRFVqB3KrbQr93MY Message-ID: To: bnossum@norwia.no Cc: John Cowan , JSON WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113d3c6a34b03505500f9f20" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Json] JSON files in old-time DOS 8.3 file system, proposed extension "JON". X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 21:41:52 -0000 --001a113d3c6a34b03505500f9f20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Back in the day I worked in the HEP community. One of the constraints on writing code for many experiments was that it had to run on CERNVM which was limited to eight letter variables due to the linker and compiler being obsolete. At the time pretty much every other FORTRAN compiler/linker could handle 32 character variables. The constraint was having real impact on code quality. I think that this is one of those instances where the IETF as a standards body should set a precedent and tell people to just fix their systems rather than suggest fixes for something that would be better left to die. 8.3 letter filenames were made obsolete in Windows 95. The FAT filesystem is incompatible with the vast majority of storage media made today. On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 4:39 PM, wrote: > Dear Mr. Hallam-Baker, > > Like it or not, many embedded devices have the perhaps unfortunate > combination of a FAT file system and an Ethernet MAC. You may think that > qualifies as "retro computing", I could not possibly comment. > > It is no problem for me to name a file "SOMETHNG.TXT" and let it in fact > describe json objects. But because JSON is an open-standard file format I > find it advantageous that it should have a distinct file extension, hence > my proposal. ".JSN" is a good proposal, (fr prhps bvs rsns), the exact > extension is a minor matter. > > Respectfully, > Baard Nossum > > > > =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=B9If you are doing retro computing then you shoul= dn't be using JSON at > > all. > > > > =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=B9 > > > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM, John Cowan wrote: > > > >> > >> On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 3:04 AM, wrote: > >> > >> I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file extension ".JON= " > >>> for old FAT file systems? I realize that this problem will eventuall= y > >>> go > >>> away, but probably not for a good many years. > >>> > >> > >> I think "JSN" would be better because more recognizable (cnsnnts r mr > >> rcgnzbl thn vwels). In OS/8, a good extension would be JN, to avoid > >> collision with JS for JavaScript. > >> > >> -- > >> John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan > cowan@ccil.org > >> It was dreary and wearisome. Cold clammy winter still held sway in th= is > >> forsaken country. The only green was the scum of livid weed on the da= rk > >> greasy surfaces of the sullen waters. Dead grasses and rotting reeds > >> loomed > >> up in the mists like ragged shadows of long-forgotten summers. > >> --LOTR, "The Passage of the Marshes" > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> json mailing list > >> json@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > >> > >> > > > > > Best regards, > Baard Nossum, +47 92409073 > > > --001a113d3c6a34b03505500f9f20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bac= k in the day I worked in the HEP community. One of the constraints on writi= ng code for many experiments was that it had to run on CERNVM which was lim= ited to eight letter variables due to the linker and compiler being obsolet= e.

At the time pretty muc= h every other FORTRAN compiler/linker could handle 32 character variables. = The constraint was having real impact on code quality.

I think that this is one of those instances w= here the IETF as a standards body should set a precedent and tell people to= just fix their systems rather than suggest fixes for something that would = be better left to die. 8.3 letter filenames were made obsolete in Windows 9= 5. The FAT filesystem is incompatible with the vast majority of storage med= ia made today.=C2=A0


=


On Sun, May 21,= 2017 at 4:39 PM, <bnossum@norwia.no> wrote:
Dear Mr. Hallam-Baker,

Like it or not, many embedded devices have the perhaps unfortunate
combination of a FAT file system and an Ethernet MAC. You may think that qualifies as "retro computing", I could not possibly comment.

It is no problem for me to name a file "SOMETHNG.TXT" and let it = in fact
describe json objects. But because JSON is an open-standard file format I find it advantageous that it should have a distinct file extension, hence my proposal. ".JSN" is a good proposal, (fr prhps bvs rsns), the = exact
extension is a minor matter.

Respectfully,
Baard Nossum


> =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=B9If you are doing retro computing then you shou= ldn't be using JSON at
> all.
>
> =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=B9
>
> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 3:04 AM, <bnossum@norwia.no> wrote:
>>
>> I wonder if it would be worthwhile to specify the file extension &= quot;.JON"
>>> for old FAT file systems?=C2=A0 I realize that this problem wi= ll eventually
>>> go
>>> away, but probably not for a good many years.
>>>
>>
>> I think "JSN" would be better because more recognizable = (cnsnnts r mr
>> rcgnzbl thn vwels).=C2=A0 In OS/8, a good extension would be JN, t= o avoid
>> collision with JS for JavaScript.
>>
>> --
>> John Cowan=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 http://vrici.loj= ban.org/~cowan=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 cowan@ccil.org
>> It was dreary and wearisome.=C2=A0 Cold clammy winter still held s= way in this
>> forsaken country.=C2=A0 The only green was the scum of livid weed = on the dark
>> greasy surfaces of the sullen waters.=C2=A0 Dead grasses and rotti= ng reeds
>> loomed
>> up in the mists like ragged shadows of long-forgotten summers.
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0--LOTR, "The Passage of the = Marshes"
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> json mailing list
>> json@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>
>>
>


Best regards,
Baard Nossum, +47 92= 409073



--001a113d3c6a34b03505500f9f20--