From barryleiba@gmail.com Tue May 7 08:56:55 2013 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 3694621F8F3C for ; Tue, 7 May 2013 08:56:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CmZiamBGh9nG for ; Tue, 7 May 2013 08:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com (mail-la0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5075921F8616 for ; Tue, 7 May 2013 08:56:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f50.google.com with SMTP id fl20so750308lab.9 for ; Tue, 07 May 2013 08:56:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=8xDbIqdmZaDxGkue72CauSxTLKcVII2a2vZnArQRJEc=; b=igr0fn5NNIj6nB3OuQTJQyYDnHaYBp9oeQv9quqtI3GF5Az5TkRDMd/lOCpEUhf+Wx 9myjvKD5Ji+GhjNBntr0amSWbrbi6jW+KVwHCpBTGWo3HUeo7evaTMKTuutFpQiuN70X ubp7cmLxeWlxcRAw9Fho7uGHYwI6c9d+N5qi71nkQMhTz4dnGIvR88qnG2+2cM4BMhU4 oxg1P/9cYWfYAayn7PybRO//8Ir5vWL6QR/rWEuWkae5KD648JlkkfGvkqi0uOIe+zQ/ IPn1TUqgfpX56PYfRWZiYDyXCfK8dieFsP7jBCR1Up7WOvHmGvT4WrhKvK7lG36lTvqx RBWw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.210.6 with SMTP id mq6mr1355089lbc.7.1367942212983; Tue, 07 May 2013 08:56:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.34.9 with HTTP; Tue, 7 May 2013 08:56:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:56:52 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7FNmcT-qzYrVQdre78Fb2aQNasQ Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "json@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [Json] JSON chartering update X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 15:56:55 -0000 Keeping everyone in the loop... The JSON charter proposal is into the formal chartering process: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-json/ Here's how the process goes from here: - The charter state is currently in "Internal Review", which is review by the IESG and the IAB. The current charter version is -00-00, which has what was agreed to on the json mailing list. - Comments may come from the IAB and IESG in the next two weeks. Comments that are made as formal ballots will be sent to the json mailing list. Other comments might be made directly to the IESG and IAB lists. - I will make minor editorial changes directly, and will pass anything else to the json mailing list. I'm the only one who can revise the charter text at this point, and each revision will increment the second number: -00-01, then -00-02, and so on. You can use the "History" tab on the datatracker link (above) to compare versions. - On 16 May, the IESG will probably approve the charter for external review, and notices will go out by the 17th to the ietf-announce and new-work lists. At that point, the charter state will be put into "External Review". - On 30 May, the IESG will probably approve the formation of the working group. The final charter version will then be -01 (without the second number). Again, you can get diffs from the "History" tab. Assuming that everything goes as planned, you should hear about the approval, along with who the chairs are, around the end of May. Barry, Applications AD From turners@ieca.com Thu May 9 08:19:39 2013 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 1E65D21F8FB6; Thu, 9 May 2013 08:19:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yCA2BRkvePnd; Thu, 9 May 2013 08:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E65521F918C; Thu, 9 May 2013 08:19:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Sean Turner" To: The IESG X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.44.p7 Message-ID: <20130509151934.23754.71621.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 08:19:34 -0700 Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: [Json] Sean Turner's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 15:19:39 -0000 Sean Turner has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-json-00-00: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Please define what a serialization is for Pete ;) From barryleiba@gmail.com Sun May 12 11:48:52 2013 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 7147721F89D5 for ; Sun, 12 May 2013 11:48:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.988 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.988 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EBpJ44CbSYNc for ; Sun, 12 May 2013 11:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x234.google.com (mail-la0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7AA721F8916 for ; Sun, 12 May 2013 11:48:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id fm20so5420815lab.39 for ; Sun, 12 May 2013 11:48:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=ynRwXQkl2/EFfd43jNaS4c1YkUfZUkKNAkkjS/v1Lmg=; b=lB2Iqi4zIvXBJd3aW9qQTFdOtRVVX7xv/340pPSzDBmwM1h9BpecBE9OeREnpuvT09 WFXCifyu3lEJ5G3G07ffdBTbmY7wAn+eZJuDeVKNozmh8F8Z3JrTasfU/FIXqGKH4w/C xcae1zUoaAWDEkhu68ZvMhv1Q/p/Yzd+6mSjR9rJHTTdAggZgWXA7pGA4gdhKwqiBAel 76N+IftAlZJa0CWLISEBD57JO7fJE7RBNbZxFKt+02B8OVlsCTFzFzSODahuVdCNiPPo xn8QrzlZyFuxl94z8S9E/h3aGdFRoxqiw4XYQYPF89imJQz+BBhSoDEsvoOD1j3StDGb kuhw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.22.4 with SMTP id z4mr11509719lae.37.1368384530617; Sun, 12 May 2013 11:48:50 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.34.9 with HTTP; Sun, 12 May 2013 11:48:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 19:48:50 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5s7ANQX-JRkAa2YUC8SlahgDbBU Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "json@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [Json] Coordinating publication of 4627bis with ECMA X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 18:48:52 -0000 Because ECMA is dependent upon the results of the 4627bis work that will be this group's charter, we have discussion the situation with them in a liaison call. They are willing to have the work happen in the IETF, with their participation. They would like to jointly publish the resulting document. This is allowed by our rules: the chairs will manage the discussion and consensus as normal, and RFC 5378 allows republication of the resulting RFC. The difference will come in the IESG approval process, where we will coordinate with ECMA's approval process to ensure that the two approved versions match. I have added the following paragraph to the proposed charter: ---------------------------------- The resulting document will be jointly published as an RFC and by ECMA. ECMA participants will be participating in the working group editing through the normal process of working group participation. The responsible AD will coordinate the approval process with ECMA so that the versions of the document that are approved by each body are the same. ---------------------------------- See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-json/ Barry From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Wed May 15 03:46:38 2013 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 BFD1221F8F6D; Wed, 15 May 2013 03:46:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5fUD8LiETRPy; Wed, 15 May 2013 03:46:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 322BC21F8F53; Wed, 15 May 2013 03:46:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Stephen Farrell" To: The IESG X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.45 Message-ID: <20130515104638.7258.58118.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 03:46:38 -0700 Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: [Json] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:46:38 -0000 Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-json-00-01: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I wonder if we know how the mechanics of joint publication with = ECMA will work out. I think everyone regretted doing that with W3C = for xmldsig even though there was good will on all sides afaik, and = that it'd be better if the WG just published the RFC having checked = with ECMA at WGLC and IETF LC. Note - I don't object to the = idea of joint publication, I'm just wary that it might turn into a = swamp of conflicting rules about copyright, IPR and when stuff = happens in each process that could add significant delay and = uncertainty and might give any folks in the rough far too much = opportunity for fun. = A possibly stupid idea if you do want to stick with joint publication: = Add something to the milestones which causes a joint publication = of early on to debug the joint publication thing. = Feel free to entirely ignore that though. From lear@cisco.com Wed May 15 10:20:36 2013 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 2928C21F8EFC; Wed, 15 May 2013 10:20:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.413 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.186, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8QTNWAElAPVN; Wed, 15 May 2013 10:20:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-3.cisco.com (ams-iport-3.cisco.com [144.254.224.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BCC821F89A5; Wed, 15 May 2013 10:20:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1928; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1368638431; x=1369848031; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4oP9F5QTsubV6JT3ZjvRN0diJqjW9q8lca/X7Fmp5kg=; b=LQD8+lsPcHAf10cInq4ioJPWp8m0csZhSotcID4GAsTTrgr9PsrIvC6V KLe3Yx/pr5Zf/+1OgZ+VGzYCgGxelHScDRiTXb0qHdj14ou6M5YGED0/A JE0zsEPqScG6ewaHuAHyZbh4Wl70I7goArATelVpyy7i7Q4D2QCBdLTlz s=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AikFAGPDk1GQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABbgweDc70cfRZ0gh8BAQEDASNVARALGgIFFgsCAgkDAgECASsaBg0BBwEBiAIGrAiRQIEmjXgHgkKBEwOTZINQkT2BWIE6Og X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,678,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="13487160" Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 May 2013 17:20:27 +0000 Received: from mctiny.local ([10.61.215.216]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4FHKNMT017382 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 May 2013 17:20:24 GMT Message-ID: <5193C3D7.8030205@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:20:23 +0200 From: Eliot Lear User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Farrell References: <20130515104638.7258.58118.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130515104638.7258.58118.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 17:20:36 -0000 Hi Stephen, I would like to address some of the questions you have below: On 5/15/13 12:46 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > I wonder if we know how the mechanics of joint publication with > ECMA will work out. I think everyone regretted doing that with W3C > for xmldsig even though there was good will on all sides afaik, and > that it'd be better if the WG just published the RFC having checked > with ECMA at WGLC and IETF LC. Note - I don't object to the > idea of joint publication, I'm just wary that it might turn into a > swamp of conflicting rules about copyright, IPR and when stuff > happens in each process that could add significant delay and > uncertainty and might give any folks in the rough far too much > opportunity for fun. This was discussed with the ECMA leadership. The agreement is for work to proceed in the JSON working group, for that work to be presented to ECMA for its approval, and then once we've received word, then both organizations may publish using their separate boiler plate, with permission of the authors. This approach has been vetted by the Trust. It is possible that ECMA would fail to act to approve. In this case, we would want to make a decision. Did they fail to act because there was a problem, or did it just not hit the radar? In the former case, something would have gone wrong earlier. In order to avoid that, I advise and I think Barry agrees, that the chairs seek the broadest possible consensus, and that when bumps in the road are hit, we can discuss them. > > A possibly stupid idea if you do want to stick with joint publication: > Add something to the milestones which causes a joint publication > of early on to debug the joint publication thing. > Feel free to entirely ignore that though. > > As to this suggestion, I think it's a good one, if we can get ECMA to agree. Eliot From lear@cisco.com Wed May 15 10:24:02 2013 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 C97F421F8F43; Wed, 15 May 2013 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.45 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.149, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rHcCEkWp5lrc; Wed, 15 May 2013 10:23:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-3.cisco.com (ams-iport-3.cisco.com [144.254.224.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19BB21F8FA5; Wed, 15 May 2013 10:23:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2295; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1368638635; x=1369848235; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sQ3JlFkbiHmr1mlifb3ttqzwaBeSrL6WbYIeAUDl0Ds=; b=PcybQNjiK5gmy5PD0pLH6HZmfBOTNplr6zWS8Dw+wGtXZpBFL8ECTTOx Q+0lSSClwZRK8V0529Q0ZcUUBczWtIwmICsb+CNG0tcY4afIg03APhYaa fO0zv/8XlxgWGnuHdWs6uTbIFnT2DIlVzCz1sfh1H1ax1YcL5Au/Xv+7E M=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,678,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="13487195" Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 May 2013 17:23:54 +0000 Received: from mctiny.local ([10.61.215.216]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4FHNoCW031709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 May 2013 17:23:51 GMT Message-ID: <5193C4A6.9040602@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:23:50 +0200 From: Eliot Lear User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eliot Lear References: <20130515104638.7258.58118.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5193C3D7.8030205@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <5193C3D7.8030205@cisco.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: json@ietf.org, The IESG , Stephen Farrell Subject: Re: [Json] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 17:24:02 -0000 One edit: On 5/15/13 7:20 PM, Eliot Lear wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > I would like to address some of the questions you have below: > > On 5/15/13 12:46 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > >> I wonder if we know how the mechanics of joint publication with >> ECMA will work out. I think everyone regretted doing that with W3C >> for xmldsig even though there was good will on all sides afaik, and >> that it'd be better if the WG just published the RFC having checked >> with ECMA at WGLC and IETF LC. Note - I don't object to the >> idea of joint publication, I'm just wary that it might turn into a >> swamp of conflicting rules about copyright, IPR and when stuff >> happens in each process that could add significant delay and >> uncertainty and might give any folks in the rough far too much >> opportunity for fun. > This was discussed with the ECMA leadership. The agreement is for work > to proceed in the JSON working group, for that work to be presented to > ECMA for its approval, And to the IESG for its separate approval, but that the doc would be held for publication pending ECMA approval... > and then once we've received word, then both > organizations may publish using their separate boiler plate, with > permission of the authors. This approach has been vetted by the Trust. > > It is possible that ECMA would fail to act to approve. In this case, we > would want to make a decision. Did they fail to act because there was a > problem, or did it just not hit the radar? In the former case, > something would have gone wrong earlier. In order to avoid that, I > advise and I think Barry agrees, that the chairs seek the broadest > possible consensus, and that when bumps in the road are hit, we can > discuss them. > > >> A possibly stupid idea if you do want to stick with joint publication: >> Add something to the milestones which causes a joint publication >> of early on to debug the joint publication thing. >> Feel free to entirely ignore that though. >> >> > As to this suggestion, I think it's a good one, if we can get ECMA to agree. > > Eliot > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > > From bclaise@cisco.com Thu May 16 01:29:03 2013 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 3116721F854D; Thu, 16 May 2013 01:29:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XxmY+WlUulZb; Thu, 16 May 2013 01:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF3221F9130; Thu, 16 May 2013 01:28:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Benoit Claise" To: The IESG X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.45 Message-ID: <20130516082858.9386.7750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 01:28:58 -0700 Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: [Json] Benoit Claise's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 08:29:03 -0000 Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-json-00-01: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Probably a detail, but it puzzles me. Maybe I read too much into this... "Any changes that break compatibility with existing implementations of either RFC 4627 or the ECMAScript specification will need to have very strong justification and broad support." Versus = "Any changes that break compatibility with the RFC 4627 or the ECMAScript specifications will need to have very strong justification and broad support." Is this intentional that you mention the existing implementations of RFC 4627? Do you expect discrepancies between the "existing implementations of RFC 4627" and the "RFC 4627 specifications" (and ECMAScript specification btw)? The way it's written implies that the existing implementations are the reference versus the specifications. From barryleiba@gmail.com Thu May 16 07:02:47 2013 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 4AA3521F872E; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:02:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.71 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.71 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.267, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CgOE0NztgsCP; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:02:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com (mail-lb0-f181.google.com [209.85.217.181]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CFF621F90CD; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:02:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f181.google.com with SMTP id w20so2731025lbh.26 for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:02:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=nrPXtJDNZCsAH9Sl9pu3Mqzuuca0UCsB/+a/+VjE8Wk=; b=P80tEuEsO5AY/iszHy62wIpoV8CfaZZMCF87ZNu9oe7A0sUqPeA07Pra8SZ4hl4let Xq4qOin0xqIi27QLIDq9CfsPd49gH2J2aYQO+KA4WtqNUYlD36qMdoSXHAsV3ZvGlwiR UzbtZvVtzXUsSH0xW2jLCNmyhtL0A8Cpr9SCNXVYcofR/tPzWIy/aZHZKGTOeiy/1fHQ 8DTS+vtNFodCA76HxFG5KmHPFxWNSknPxt3jNtzTBJSuxdD5JurnbWWQUAj5JnsMKgBc /kDLP3mDJK/PTGpKM6d+7lJXWMsbhc8EA5nEoeDUnbZcBZHWyoqVtzwu7W6iw6SNzo+Z fWiA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.87.69 with SMTP id v5mr20605679laz.24.1368712959452; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.34.9 with HTTP; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:02:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130516082858.9386.7750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20130516082858.9386.7750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 15:02:39 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2tN6Svpbhs1Th3jEw2XKkemxr2Q Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Benoit Claise Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: The IESG , "json@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Json] Benoit Claise's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 14:02:47 -0000 > Probably a detail, but it puzzles me. Maybe I read too much into this... I think you are. > "Any changes that break compatibility with existing implementations of > either RFC 4627 or > the ECMAScript specification will need to have very strong justification > and broad support." > > Versus > > "Any changes that break compatibility with the RFC 4627 or > the ECMAScript specifications will need to have very strong > justification > and broad support." > > Is this intentional that you mention the existing implementations of RFC > 4627? Yes. Consider that this is an essentially similar situation to what we had in going from PS to DS... except here we're going from Informational to PS. The point, though, is that we have a mature protocol that's moving in the Standards Track (here, *into* the Standards Track). The justification required for a change increases with the level of disruption it would cause to what's out there. Errata are easy. Useful changes that are fully compatible with current implementations are still easy; the conversation should be brief. Important changes that break compatibility are still within scope, but require a very strong justification, and will probably involve a lot more discussion. Your version (the second above) doesn't make much sense: changes to the spec are changes to the spec. The point is to consider the effect those changes will have on implementations. Barry From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Thu May 16 07:49:54 2013 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 8AB0421F8C4C; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:49:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.633 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.633 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eUsW+amAUd2I; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:49:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFDE21F8C00; Thu, 16 May 2013 07:49:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-173.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.173]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4GEnmrR047145 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 16 May 2013 07:49:49 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <20130516082858.9386.7750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 07:49:48 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <21D9D5AB-56AA-4B26-9782-267A8648FEE7@vpnc.org> References: <20130516082858.9386.7750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Benoit Claise X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Cc: The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Benoit Claise's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 14:49:54 -0000 On May 16, 2013, at 1:28 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: > Do you expect discrepancies between the "existing implementations of = RFC > 4627" and the "RFC 4627 specifications" (and ECMAScript specification > btw)? There are known discrepancies between RFC 4627 and ECMAScript, and some = implementations rely on one versus the other. See = , = particularly slides 4 and 5. --Paul Hoffman From bclaise@cisco.com Thu May 16 10:14:07 2013 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 B7BA021F8F6E; Thu, 16 May 2013 10:14:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.389 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.210, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b+Ec-vLPLJws; Thu, 16 May 2013 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D92711E8129; Thu, 16 May 2013 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r4GHDur6017552; Thu, 16 May 2013 19:13:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.60.67.87] (ams-bclaise-8916.cisco.com [10.60.67.87]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r4GHDTZN013243; Thu, 16 May 2013 19:13:45 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <519513B9.20703@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 19:13:29 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barry Leiba References: <20130516082858.9386.7750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: The IESG , "json@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Json] Benoit Claise's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:14:07 -0000 Ok, thanks Barry. Regards, Benoit >> Probably a detail, but it puzzles me. Maybe I read too much into this... > I think you are. > >> "Any changes that break compatibility with existing implementations of >> either RFC 4627 or >> the ECMAScript specification will need to have very strong justification >> and broad support." >> >> Versus >> >> "Any changes that break compatibility with the RFC 4627 or >> the ECMAScript specifications will need to have very strong >> justification >> and broad support." >> >> Is this intentional that you mention the existing implementations of RFC >> 4627? > Yes. > > Consider that this is an essentially similar situation to what we had > in going from PS to DS... except here we're going from Informational > to PS. The point, though, is that we have a mature protocol that's > moving in the Standards Track (here, *into* the Standards Track). The > justification required for a change increases with the level of > disruption it would cause to what's out there. > > Errata are easy. > Useful changes that are fully compatible with current implementations > are still easy; the conversation should be brief. > Important changes that break compatibility are still within scope, but > require a very strong justification, and will probably involve a lot > more discussion. > > Your version (the second above) doesn't make much sense: changes to > the spec are changes to the spec. The point is to consider the effect > those changes will have on implementations. > > Barry > > From derhoermi@gmx.net Fri May 17 03:06:29 2013 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 E773521F9380 for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 03:06:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lY5btCngQt2f for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 03:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4535621F8C23 for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 03:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.10]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MQbf1-1V5AdB1aKD-00U6gK for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:24 +0200 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 17 May 2013 10:06:24 -0000 Received: from p5B231E93.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO netb.Speedport_W_700V) [91.35.30.147] by mail.gmx.net (mp010) with SMTP; 17 May 2013 12:06:24 +0200 X-Authenticated: #723575 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+GP2V/f3OGCxdceLpJA7St+a8jioQaCBKulks7+s NLTjujSCYBC5iy From: Bjoern Hoehrmann To: "json@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:26 +0200 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: Re: [Json] Coordinating publication of 4627bis with ECMA X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 10:06:30 -0000 * Barry Leiba wrote: >Because ECMA is dependent upon the results of the 4627bis work that >will be this group's charter, we have discussion the situation with >them in a liaison call. They are willing to have the work happen in >the IETF, with their participation. They would like to jointly >publish the resulting document. No objection, but for the record, I would very much prefer to never ever see confusion or fights around which of the two publications to reference, especially if errata are identified after publication, so I would prefer to have just the RFC, and would not encourage ECMA to republish it. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ From ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org Fri May 17 08:48:58 2013 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 631F221F95FF for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:48:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.523 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.077, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JtEbN7B-8Noa for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:48:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51DE21F960B for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:48:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: json@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.45 Message-ID: <20130517154857.8920.3768.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 08:48:57 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat Subject: [Json] State changed: charter-ietf-json-00-01 X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 15:48:58 -0000 State changed to External review. URL: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-json/ From barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Fri May 17 12:06:54 2013 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 25BC021F9775 for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.017 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.017 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WH5WQtiPVu1C for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-x22d.google.com (mail-vb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c02::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9895A21F92CB for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vb0-f45.google.com with SMTP id 12so1694443vbf.32 for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=mNk/D21sRzV9iXTV7fDRA2JlCbr9X46kdIBX6RH/xLM=; b=dvDu0QwWOzIwvpSiRTAgrCNOvg2gl64V6Yx/hWPOJSdn4Ir0MBlVIruFBKUIfGErBT njqupOvnuSN1FkNsICldSBPDwGkMXVGf8qm/HLmK/QDGNqogR4Khqbrd0zRiCrE9YIDT KU6tD7JMExzozuVkbA0hERe9H3r7CTD7LgWGUA4MTccTCRXZ+2R9WrYn1f3bhG3jqpjf A8vx+k1v/91+19vyh0SeBxnhT16K1FXc0oU8tnh4YIlpdCvxlf+ViRqIzX4UIbwmtASB DbC24HQHyulrIP2DRnFBHBonJvvcTmbmW1K0UPk937CuCAWSelF4r7/LUb1UeShkxyvL NxoA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.247.130 with SMTP id ye2mr30437123vec.35.1368817612935; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.58.6.233 with HTTP; Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130517154857.8920.3768.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20130517154857.8920.3768.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 15:06:52 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: auX2Dgbv-AicJVrZcaHONHqEpQA Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: json@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [Json] State changed: charter-ietf-json-00-01 X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 19:06:54 -0000 > State changed to External review. > > URL: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-json/ FYI, the announcement that goes along with this was sent to the ietf-announce list: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg11505.html Barry From sm@resistor.net Mon May 20 01:59:28 2013 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 011F821F842F; Mon, 20 May 2013 01:59:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.248, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z4vlSPQ3vlRY; Mon, 20 May 2013 01:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027AC11E80FC; Mon, 20 May 2013 01:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4K8N36V013811; Mon, 20 May 2013 01:23:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1369038188; bh=tbD14NqS90BkIbNKkEYH8Zro+pL1g8fo1mW4TnaY+fg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=M2ayQcy+y5TX2LFLbHi06vCgqVJ3o4K3qxd/xUnhHmnqZThu0Mtk6h0dzIAG4Wfh7 DMwgFIM2udaGdg/gDMcHvLZDlNNT7CgqgUVc/KNapZLpEFw4fuMOxy+jnXaJ7Lgsmk gnp1I9OEqcmkHGQVfd95maB0YQe2BB01za+HAQ3o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1369038188; i=@resistor.net; bh=tbD14NqS90BkIbNKkEYH8Zro+pL1g8fo1mW4TnaY+fg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=dj9vBs6T3JDlvrHDdTWRf9RPOJO3bhwdkbovJ2xCd5uI6ZmgIRtBttOBFw/huvl2h jU//7BkC2l3+BwAkMyT+U1D7B++3C7WBakgThUs/tZMBOYAtYY8wLnt37DfkcrGvVy PbqNXbhZPL3Adlc3+nup8Yg03xNkjUTLMo8yHXZs= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130520011300.0ce753b0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 01:22:28 -0700 To: iesg@ietf.org From: SM In-Reply-To: <20130517155031.6329.6238.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20130517155031.6329.6238.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] WG Review: JavaScript Object Notation (json) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 08:59:28 -0000 At 08:50 17-05-2013, The IESG wrote: >A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Applications Area. The >IESG has not made any determination yet. The following draft charter was >submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send >your comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg at ietf.org) by 2013-05-27. [snip] >The resulting document will be jointly published as an RFC and by ECMA. >ECMA participants will be participating in the working group editing >through the normal process of working group participation. The >responsible >AD will coordinate the approval process with ECMA so that the versions >of the document that are approved by each body are the same. In my opinion the argument for the restricted copyright in the IETF is to avoid divergence of a specification in future. The proposed charter (see text above) is about creating two (I assume identical) versions of the JSON specification. Which one will be the authoritative version? Please note that I do not have a strong opinion about this. Regards, -sm From barryleiba@gmail.com Mon May 20 05:59:51 2013 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 64EFB21F8E99; Mon, 20 May 2013 05:59:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.006 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.006 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.028, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JNMALAfjZxEE; Mon, 20 May 2013 05:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x236.google.com (mail-la0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6473C21F8935; Mon, 20 May 2013 05:59:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id eg20so3750423lab.27 for ; Mon, 20 May 2013 05:59:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=TV8lTSAgINxJIVyP254f7O7rxli9MoGv8i85aZ+6Ul0=; b=ZL5oYBqFl2hbYEBBl+83+cRe7AJmnsX/lWAMXR+fE9e/E1hwgvED9iAYwyMlQNflpo 72C6EmYqUSYRXp8rZQahfpSeZY0F9n+3f0beRXkzIt507Cz3nMJvwMEiJ7LgKzuJG09q GA4OtcLwJE21uEEpmjCQ2wQKVgFEK9xBwk038oV9bEKc+8Jlpa+9efw04oR+uP6+U7S0 rF6Hw2fGJxY7ooyBi8E6TAMUtGb3IN8G50EO9HUM7VhqilFruWX1tv/3F3q7XDtiDAay zkGnpxYp227NaMlQ429FCtUPHSWUeJ9EoTItB/mkI5SMmQXWDJWqRcKiB2U/cHNoRURw nSFg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.26.41 with SMTP id i9mr3979007lag.12.1369054788307; Mon, 20 May 2013 05:59:48 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.34.9 with HTTP; Mon, 20 May 2013 05:59:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130520011300.0ce753b0@resistor.net> References: <20130517155031.6329.6238.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130520011300.0ce753b0@resistor.net> Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 08:59:48 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: CkIDAtBjvHEUsLzM-fYZfzFirjw Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: SM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: IESG , "json@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Json] WG Review: JavaScript Object Notation (json) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 12:59:51 -0000 >> AD will coordinate the approval process with ECMA so that the versions >> of the document that are approved by each body are the same. > > In my opinion the argument for the restricted copyright in the IETF is to > avoid divergence of a specification in future. The proposed charter (see > text above) is about creating two (I assume identical) versions of the JSON > specification. Which one will be the authoritative version? Please note > that I do not have a strong opinion about this. The 5378 rules allow anyone to republish IETF documents -- even without our agreement, ECMA could republish an identical version (yes, the intent is to have the version be identical, modulo organizational boilerplate). I've checked this with Jorge. I hope we can avoid the issue of "which is authoritative" by having the document say that it is being jointly published. But it's certainly true that if they should differ, for whatever reason, the question will arise. Barry From ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org Sun May 26 19:42:45 2013 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 26AD621F941F for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 19:42:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hfhsLXeYAt1o for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 19:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7DD821F940B for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 19:42:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: json@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.50 Message-ID: <20130527024244.27880.18603.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 19:42:44 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat Subject: [Json] State changed: charter-ietf-json-00-01 X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 02:42:45 -0000 State changed to IESG review. URL: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-json/ From adrian@olddog.co.uk Sun May 26 21:56:12 2013 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 C086221F8B60; Sun, 26 May 2013 21:56:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ji2vrfxFyeT3; Sun, 26 May 2013 21:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5941221F8B18; Sun, 26 May 2013 21:56:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Adrian Farrel" To: The IESG X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.50 Message-ID: <20130527045612.32655.32729.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 21:56:12 -0700 Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: [Json] Adrian Farrel's No Objection on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 04:56:12 -0000 Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-json-00-01: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nit... "It makes sense to move RFC 4627 onto the Standards Track." Of course it makes sense, but I don't know that it really needs to said in the charter (are there other parts of the charter that don't make sense ;-) From presnick@qti.qualcomm.com Wed May 29 21:54:41 2013 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 21AFE21F937B; Wed, 29 May 2013 21:54:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o3obTmg5J-lp; Wed, 29 May 2013 21:54:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCDC321F929F; Wed, 29 May 2013 21:54:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Pete Resnick" To: The IESG X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.50 Message-ID: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 21:54:40 -0700 Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 04:54:41 -0000 Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-json-00-01: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- There is an ambiguity in the charter. I am OK with this ambiguity (and given the likelihood I'm going to be responsible AD for this group, I had better be), but I wanted to make sure that the IESG was crystal clear on this: Paragraphs 4 & 5 indicate that the WG has a "goal" of a "reclassification in place, with minimal changes", and then list fixing errata, and correcting errors and inconsistencies as such minimal changes. However, this charter does not explicitly disallow other changes. It would *not* be a charter violation for the WG to come to consensus that a change that neither fixes an erratum nor corrects an error/inconsistency (e.g., a completely new feature) is nonetheless an acceptable change to make. I'm OK with that, but I want to make sure that everybody else understands that to be the case. From lear@cisco.com Thu May 30 00:09:56 2013 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 01FC421F971A; Thu, 30 May 2013 00:09:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q8t3IFmv7uSn; Thu, 30 May 2013 00:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E121621F971B; Thu, 30 May 2013 00:09:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1822; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1369897789; x=1371107389; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V/2B+ofjiUu4bbXUDqFSd3f6yysAi+Dr9/3uqQ5BcQM=; b=WUUsKbS05BvINJ/GRNAUJ+JSc0abTjUV6XJJ4FOoxspdadGrCprrvEay vvyKcCLM9Ce3MtAoBDIcc0VXxH7RJhgNEi5RM+Bu7YdLDiJkM3mjc99D/ eyDTjdaUZxpchDcPmIAYsT6yVmAu1kqJuTLf2E6wJeH7Ptl0fnveUcZyb s=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag8GAHn6plGQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABZgwkwgzu+T4ECFnSCGwgBAQEEAQEBIEsLEAsOCgICBSECAg8CFhYaBg0BBQIBAYVyghcMp1eSCwSBJowrgUIHgkMOgQYDlzuRQIMROoE1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,769,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="82979675" Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 May 2013 07:09:45 +0000 Received: from mctiny.local ([10.61.168.152]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4U79hQk020561 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 30 May 2013 07:09:44 GMT Message-ID: <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 09:09:43 +0200 From: Eliot Lear User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pete Resnick References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 07:09:56 -0000 Pete, As we are doing a dance with another standards organization, and as this is a functioning piece of work used throughout the Internet, I would be very careful about accepting other changes, and I would suggest that the bar be set high. In this respect, I'd encourage the removal of the ambiguity. Eliot On 5/30/13 6:54 AM, Pete Resnick wrote: > Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-json-00-01: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > There is an ambiguity in the charter. I am OK with this ambiguity (and > given the likelihood I'm going to be responsible AD for this group, I had > better be), but I wanted to make sure that the IESG was crystal clear on > this: Paragraphs 4 & 5 indicate that the WG has a "goal" of a > "reclassification in place, with minimal changes", and then list fixing > errata, and correcting errors and inconsistencies as such minimal > changes. However, this charter does not explicitly disallow other > changes. It would *not* be a charter violation for the WG to come to > consensus that a change that neither fixes an erratum nor corrects an > error/inconsistency (e.g., a completely new feature) is nonetheless an > acceptable change to make. I'm OK with that, but I want to make sure that > everybody else understands that to be the case. > > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > > From sm@resistor.net Thu May 30 03:07:40 2013 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 35EDE21F937B; Thu, 30 May 2013 03:07:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.289, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HzbbQ7lq-cvW; Thu, 30 May 2013 03:07:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C798621F9294; Thu, 30 May 2013 03:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4UA7SE7016511; Thu, 30 May 2013 03:07:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1369908455; bh=b6JEe2dKSYXofJZ1e9Jnv/J0cB2WFiOhUEhIGVp/Zb8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=nfW+VUC2U/98TXQoTqy5Se22HAsWDZjQxusbrQxzTWJFyyF9PmCHI13QMud3xfk+K ZzpFvgH5AJpEtcYiaFGq6F6aqNzWb41bo8f6P94Sqf4gnK0Vaaal5uJn8IsAs70O5H TMjcMywyv/copf2bTv800O53ZhEzhqsjfHnzzRmM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1369908455; i=@resistor.net; bh=b6JEe2dKSYXofJZ1e9Jnv/J0cB2WFiOhUEhIGVp/Zb8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=krUZFSllcNRXeg915AhvuSbR5vsmrOM8Rv53dPVI5NNEULgcoBTXHtv7aPOQs0pUj J4lMb2nxqwMycy7oqhTGZ19ccR+RKXjQZUlqTzVJICe/rAkJdqVRmEFnVJFJ+Dqzgu agavPlevhdMgSaxQPhkhH0hQ0sQMQ6KOFi5aNQJo= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130530030056.0d462cb0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 03:07:10 -0700 To: Eliot Lear , Pete Resnick From: SM In-Reply-To: <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:07:40 -0000 At 00:09 30-05-2013, Eliot Lear wrote: >As we are doing a dance with another standards organization, and as this >is a functioning piece of work used throughout the Internet, I would be >very careful about accepting other changes, and I would suggest that the >bar be set high. In this respect, I'd encourage the removal of the >ambiguity. I agree with what Eliot mentioned above. The proposed working group could reach consensus on making a change instead of correcting errors and inconsistencies. It's better to close the loophole if the working group is of the opinion that it is not a good idea. Once the document it will be too late to consider whether it is a good idea or not as the focus will be on the details of the change. Regards, -sm From turners@ieca.com Thu May 30 05:46:07 2013 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 B5D5E21F93E6 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 05:46:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.286 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.286 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8hIOULmCtIPa for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 05:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway09.websitewelcome.com (gateway09.websitewelcome.com [67.18.39.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8848121F93DE for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 05:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gateway09.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 507) id 8854C4B8DCF77; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:45:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: from gator1743.hostgator.com (gator1743.hostgator.com [184.173.253.227]) by gateway09.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716114B8DCF13 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:45:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [173.73.135.101] (port=54920 helo=thunderfish.local) by gator1743.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ui2Et-0000G1-Tm; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:45:55 -0500 Message-ID: <51A74A02.1020306@ieca.com> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 08:45:54 -0400 From: Sean Turner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pete Resnick References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator1743.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ieca.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: (thunderfish.local) [173.73.135.101]:54920 X-Source-Auth: sean.turner@ieca.com X-Email-Count: 13 X-Source-Cap: ZG9tbWdyNDg7ZG9tbWdyNDg7Z2F0b3IxNzQzLmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20= Cc: The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:46:07 -0000 On 5/30/13 12:54 AM, Pete Resnick wrote: > Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-json-00-01: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > There is an ambiguity in the charter. I am OK with this ambiguity (and > given the likelihood I'm going to be responsible AD for this group, I had > better be), but I wanted to make sure that the IESG was crystal clear on > this: Paragraphs 4 & 5 indicate that the WG has a "goal" of a > "reclassification in place, with minimal changes", and then list fixing > errata, and correcting errors and inconsistencies as such minimal > changes. However, this charter does not explicitly disallow other > changes. It would *not* be a charter violation for the WG to come to > consensus that a change that neither fixes an erratum nor corrects an > error/inconsistency (e.g., a completely new feature) is nonetheless an > acceptable change to make. I'm OK with that, but I want to make sure that > everybody else understands that to be the case. I'm fine with this. The wg, wg chairs, and the AD will use their judgement to determine what a "minimal change" is. spt From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Thu May 30 07:06:02 2013 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 44F7321F85B8; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:06:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JlOK8NOY8Z0o; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:06:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1170E21F8E9A; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-173.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.173]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4UE5LFB060583 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 30 May 2013 07:05:21 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 07:05:21 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1FE64995-D319-40D0-9994-AF0E1FEACFD8@vpnc.org> References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> To: Eliot Lear X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Cc: Pete Resnick , The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:06:02 -0000 On May 30, 2013, at 12:09 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: > Pete, >=20 > As we are doing a dance with another standards organization, and as = this > is a functioning piece of work used throughout the Internet, I would = be > very careful about accepting other changes, and I would suggest that = the > bar be set high. In this respect, I'd encourage the removal of the > ambiguity. I do not share Pete's concern, given that it is impossible to define = "minimal" without looking at any proposed changes. However, since others = do, a possible last-minute change to get rid of "goal" would be: Current: The initial goal of this work is ... Proposed: The initial work is ... --Paul Hoffman= From tbray@textuality.com Thu May 30 07:08:04 2013 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 1760E21F91B7 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:08:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8vypoWGqmdTE for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-f173.google.com (mail-vc0-f173.google.com [209.85.220.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF4B721F8689 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:07:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id ht10so188496vcb.18 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:07:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=ddlZm01M/EDkZl/BCdguZPNj72N5uDJRjFxFuwC84uI=; b=NR5qxn7INhVl8NZ/6y7ENWtq+209YiUylrBALAYTCGWbNalNsD/KNJBW9xy1sWBVR6 f7lqpAYdEpTu22VKDrjpPfK+ZQLCoGLezhynlpogbM6l42LNzwFkGdvIEkvjpdg4JAzt DKqujNwGdPgWbLssOIVLkglxRfABSeYaQv6dbNYsUvgdFslNu4UtgoV+bEqrpGwJ9cuG JHLRFogbx2BrL6LkzIIBdvr8v9wgd7K1DPQRoRNFhsqW+lF1ibmPJRyfp29DkBiK5BQR XT1WQGORR2giMwOK1KdvEMUePQSISp9KsRWs3ynTDPuKjI7Va5s/Lnzg2T/W5H6Q30R6 jztA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.35.196 with SMTP id k4mr4777510vdj.77.1369922829355; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:07:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.48.14 with HTTP; Thu, 30 May 2013 07:07:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32] In-Reply-To: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 07:07:09 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: Pete Resnick Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3079be3c9d1f4104ddf003f6 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQko93SDA4nmweNDBvXBYBc37pnCma8FiHgJWA9tUVOIHGqVfbgbt1Oc9pbhKO2Ap+wJFMko Cc: The IESG , "json@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:08:04 -0000 --20cf3079be3c9d1f4104ddf003f6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tolerable risk; let=E2=80=99s trust ourselves not to be stupid. -T On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Pete Resnick wr= ote: > Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-json-00-01: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > There is an ambiguity in the charter. I am OK with this ambiguity (and > given the likelihood I'm going to be responsible AD for this group, I had > better be), but I wanted to make sure that the IESG was crystal clear on > this: Paragraphs 4 & 5 indicate that the WG has a "goal" of a > "reclassification in place, with minimal changes", and then list fixing > errata, and correcting errors and inconsistencies as such minimal > changes. However, this charter does not explicitly disallow other > changes. It would *not* be a charter violation for the WG to come to > consensus that a change that neither fixes an erratum nor corrects an > error/inconsistency (e.g., a completely new feature) is nonetheless an > acceptable change to make. I'm OK with that, but I want to make sure that > everybody else understands that to be the case. > > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > --20cf3079be3c9d1f4104ddf003f6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tolerable risk; let=E2=80=99s trust ourselves not to be st= upid. -T


On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.q= ualcomm.com> wrote:
Pete Resnick has entered the following ballo= t position for
charter-ietf-json-00-01: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)





----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There is an ambiguity in the charter. I am OK with this ambiguity (and
given the likelihood I'm going to be responsible AD for this group, I h= ad
better be), but I wanted to make sure that the IESG was crystal clear on this: Paragraphs 4 & 5 indicate that the WG has a "goal" of a=
"reclassification in place, with minimal changes", and then list = fixing
errata, and correcting errors and inconsistencies as such minimal
changes. However, this charter does not explicitly disallow other
changes. It would *not* be a charter violation for the WG to come to
consensus that a change that neither fixes an erratum nor corrects an
error/inconsistency (e.g., a completely new feature) is nonetheless an
acceptable change to make. I'm OK with that, but I want to make sure th= at
everybody else understands that to be the case.


_______________________________________________
json mailing list
json@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json

--20cf3079be3c9d1f4104ddf003f6-- From mamille2@cisco.com Thu May 30 08:58:02 2013 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 19CE221F9509; Thu, 30 May 2013 08:57:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.724 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.724 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.875, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xj4abNrJ9lTJ; Thu, 30 May 2013 08:57:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4019321F946F; Thu, 30 May 2013 08:57:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7288; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1369929447; x=1371139047; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=uYKgY+96noolajD/3hbeydRW5MJDbZJxoK1JiXMuFTc=; b=mWNh3EySLjeH9coaZ0KnHPTf1fdJ0n3bKeCGnoPqn8FARUHL8K9EwIHP JEyskZkhHsbeB84fmg+QaOL5DqjwmrrBrbnczhWP9soCz7loeB4wR2bDx kMJNLejocbjvtOqf540zBTaEUs44cxQIVq6oZhxH9n9Wy8AM69vSJNZ2L 8=; X-Files: smime.p7s : 4136 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,770,1363132800"; d="p7s'?scan'208";a="216794396" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 May 2013 15:57:24 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com [173.37.183.75]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4UFvOp7028062 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 30 May 2013 15:57:24 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com ([169.254.6.57]) by xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([173.37.183.75]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 30 May 2013 10:57:23 -0500 From: "Matt Miller (mamille2)" To: Paul Hoffman Thread-Topic: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHOXQSzt8ljQ4SStk+edwd/VujBSZkeFzmAgAAfTAA= Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:57:23 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> <1FE64995-D319-40D0-9994-AF0E1FEACFD8@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: <1FE64995-D319-40D0-9994-AF0E1FEACFD8@vpnc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.129.24.59] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2B9B8A3B-3872-4E02-9F81-29D12FA92026"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Pete Resnick , The IESG , Eliot Lear , "" Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:58:09 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_2B9B8A3B-3872-4E02-9F81-29D12FA92026 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On May 30, 2013, at 8:05 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On May 30, 2013, at 12:09 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: >=20 >> Pete, >>=20 >> As we are doing a dance with another standards organization, and as = this >> is a functioning piece of work used throughout the Internet, I would = be >> very careful about accepting other changes, and I would suggest that = the >> bar be set high. In this respect, I'd encourage the removal of the >> ambiguity. >=20 > I do not share Pete's concern, given that it is impossible to define = "minimal" without looking at any proposed changes. However, since others = do, a possible last-minute change to get rid of "goal" would be: >=20 > Current: > The initial goal of this work is ... > Proposed: > The initial work is ... Personally, I was ok with the original language; the succeeding = paragraph, I thought, made it clear the WG would approach change with a = tremendous amount of caution and set the level of effort to ratify those = changes accordingly. However, this phrasing works for me if it alleviates the concerns of = others. - m&m Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com > Cisco Systems, Inc. --Apple-Mail=_2B9B8A3B-3872-4E02-9F81-29D12FA92026 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIMezCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICAR4wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMcJg8zOLdgasSmkLhOrlr6KMoOMpohBllVHrdRvEg/q6r8jR+EK 75xCGhR8ToREoqe7zM9/UnC6TS2y9UKTpT1v7RSMzR0t6ndl0TWBuUr/UXBhPk+Kmy7bI4yW4urC +y7P3/1/X7U8ocb8VpH/Clt+4iq7nirMcNh6qJR+xjOhV+VHzQMALuGYn5KZmc1NbJQYclsGkDxD z2UbFqE2+6vIZoL+jb9x4Pa5gNf1TwSDkOkikZB1xtB4ZqtXThaABSONdfmv/Z1pua3FYxnCFmdr /+N2JLKutIxMYqQOJebr/f/h5t95m4JgrM3Y/w7YX9d7YAL9jvN4SydHsU6n65cCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRTcu2SnODaywFc fH6WNU7y1LhRgjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBAAqDCH14qywG XLhjjF6uHLkjd02hcdh9hrw+VUsv+q1eeQWB21jWj3kJ96AUlPCoEGZ/ynJNScWy6QMVQjbbMXlt UfO4n4bGGdKo3awPWp61tjAFgraLJgDk+DsSvUD6EowjMTNx25GQgyYJ5RPIzKKR9tQW8gGK+2+R HxkUCTbYFnL6kl8Ch507rUdPPipJ9CgJFws3kDS3gOS5WFMxcjO5DwKfKSETEPrHh7p5shuuNktv sv6hxHTLhiMKX893gxdT3XLS9OKmCv87vkINQcNEcIIoFWbP9HORz9v3vQwR4e3ksLc2JZOAFK+s sS5XMEoznzpihEP0PLc4dCBYjbvSD7kxgDwZ+Aj8Q9PkbvE9sIPP7ON0fz095HdThKjiVJe6vofq +n6b1NBc8XdrQvBmunwxD5nvtTW4vtN6VY7mUCmxsCieuoBJ9OlqmsVWQvifIYf40dJPZkk9YgGT zWLpXDSfLSplbY2LL9C9U0ptvjcDjefLTvqSFc7tw1sEhF0n/qpA2r0GpvkLRDmcSwVyPvmjFBGq Up/pNy8ZuPGQmHwFi2/14+xeSUDG2bwnsYJQG2EdJCB6luQ57GEnTA/yKZSTKI8dDQa8Sd3zfXb1 9mOgSF0bBdXbuKhEpuP9wirslFe6fQ1t5j5R0xi72MZ8ikMu1RQZKCyDbMwazlHiMIIGPzCCBSeg AwIBAgIDBoRIMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRD b20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYG A1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0EwHhcN MTMwNDMwMjE1NDQyWhcNMTQwNTAyMDUzOTA0WjBbMRkwFwYDVQQNExBiN2F6NndOY0t0R3JtMEpF MRswGQYDVQQDDBJtYW1pbGxlMkBjaXNjby5jb20xITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEm1hbWlsbGUyQGNp c2NvLmNvbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAJbKBMsG+9UFTx9uq/bhhXgu vJvO8z7cwKaqqwZhVf5z/kHFyCNijtmTOE+YXjA8mWR4aoBwB5SvGypI/cJUofJ+AlBTC4g+RMx/ K0Ab4/jQqTQz9CDzMOB+Wm+rt8ZJ7A8ZzOJmNDAsf/VvB8l2A1SQz1UsAixgH16NTr8SlblAXEKk 4hwpCudUiNjjQokqJ0H686UBKVorcZSgXaza8XMqGtJF/8mNhR9GQYi7Xht1ky+9LFOrto2daZto KJRwMeVusVdHUeKEQSu7jztw8HchH3KEb7Q+r5X+hhDZoddfKE8d5eyPuhiZdrzv7OlNZ0fSLdx7 3AE3nx9/R5YlXucCAwEAAaOCAtgwggLUMAkGA1UdEwQCMAAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSwMB0GA1UdJQQW MBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUxGd+/qrdVudHrIKkw5xOMY7eaLUwHwYD VR0jBBgwFoAUU3Ltkpzg2ssBXHx+ljVO8tS4UYIwHQYDVR0RBBYwFIESbWFtaWxsZTJAY2lzY28u Y29tMIIBTAYDVR0gBIIBQzCCAT8wggE7BgsrBgEEAYG1NwECAzCCASowLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgfcGCCsGAQUFBwICMIHqMCcWIFN0YXJ0 Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQEagb5UaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIHdhcyBp c3N1ZWQgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIHRoZSBDbGFzcyAxIFZhbGlkYXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIG9m IHRoZSBTdGFydENvbSBDQSBwb2xpY3ksIHJlbGlhbmNlIG9ubHkgZm9yIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCBw dXJwb3NlIGluIGNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHJlbHlpbmcgcGFydHkgb2JsaWdhdGlvbnMuMDYG A1UdHwQvMC0wK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NydHUxLWNybC5jcmwwgY4G CCsGAQUFBwEBBIGBMH8wOQYIKwYBBQUHMAGGLWh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9zdWIv Y2xhc3MxL2NsaWVudC9jYTBCBggrBgEFBQcwAoY2aHR0cDovL2FpYS5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY2Vy dHMvc3ViLmNsYXNzMS5jbGllbnQuY2EuY3J0MCMGA1UdEgQcMBqGGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRz c2wuY29tLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAlDhXbGEI7lbqUcu5r2JHZaMsbRZda/99ZqODzWGX 0llou9jGccsAWDPPwRRe2+ROpXfH4cuJZElTcLDeZSp/qpXKhjYieFSX8+Ml9sKEj5UOSqQLyoLk PtrIJV12Jk3nuG2Jc0UeEnGwK/aqtzy7+bfEVI0ziyVM2gChHh0RH74KyiwYWknbOTRIkZcz/ulE DVFQp63uj6wfmDNvAUHBAdhKVqA1S/rfP1KcDZpf1NfvwXJibiqTRA6K1EOxTJOP41n/XdvHqHXL RWL2xrOUI9/URANr/ok3OrsuZEMFnAAGefS1bWS/hFtUGVkHGiKEBbyDW7da2ULXbuC7umrQnzGC A28wggNrAgEBMIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkG A1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRD b20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAwaESDAJBgUrDgMCGgUA oIIBrzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0xMzA1MzAxNTU3 MjJaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBRIHdER23Taq0Vb6eG3tOj6Wf1kjTCBpQYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYGX MIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2Vj dXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3Mg MSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAwaESDCBpwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZeg gZQwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1 cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAx IFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQIDBoRIMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBAIZL kt+qSDCR4c3vH7pS918rPQU5d0CTJOg35jHIrXGEiuHpLZEQRTua/U2lV9Hpzy2z49vuJojvtebK 9P1MPYEiShvhzrwFRBWzj7mySjJKgCJKU8CLnbyM21frddsCZnShWDR7OhwAzJcaAa33dKqwKRHR Z/0T9ZN7na47wiyMScLY7ecaCnD6YNzQ014qugX3Lt3m9/OVShaLxb5HZhjQRwQ5Q8Uyq0YhlLnh U37RNkdahTTSxMvHZLjkQtsPpIbXgpyS7IppDgjJXc7jmozBouc5EYPW9poAbtRNkMuxZte6RjTg xk51fpE0WN2CLDoS81FWQ9IsoP4iw8S868cAAAAAAAA= --Apple-Mail=_2B9B8A3B-3872-4E02-9F81-29D12FA92026-- From douglas@crockford.com Thu May 30 09:17:07 2013 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 D6D1221F92F5; Thu, 30 May 2013 09:17:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4mLOF2zch00H; Thu, 30 May 2013 09:17:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B610B21F9113; Thu, 30 May 2013 09:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.114.243.214] (62-50-221-240.client.stsn.net [62.50.221.240]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LmJnW-1U8Tb30yu2-00ZyMB; Thu, 30 May 2013 12:16:52 -0400 Message-ID: <51A77B6B.5000607@crockford.com> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 09:16:43 -0700 From: Douglas Crockford User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eliot Lear References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:JtsWKq8deTK/tiIYzXCnGCI0j483pn6ZojD37hKDaOA Aytbknr8wCOZfxm2eeyy3gmXC0dHexuBMy7zakTWRUzzSEueE9 QJLVPmLUmOjPyGY2Tky4UhiWtkXy3IGM11HgGdFIc10pTYVI3H tkLTrO5nbyJgPOLYC1J4lb5ym8QZtryeJORzzqus/FrdG4g2wR gbMbdG2f0oHR8KPTO3rIO3Ycb32lVVUjOQHTwpFO7URuhzGO08 p7RH3qqwZqMZWwp6A8iDSJmo/29GJAoU3nJ9IZv4/LXCUNo53h ra8xj28N+IzXTfgRNndED1VwY3YF9MeqRUTzsyFlIebDQwa9UR csjAozPdPo+JXqZg3AnZA8VjiipIAQrPI94ghkvFT Cc: Pete Resnick , The IESG , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:17:08 -0000 On 5/30/2013 12:09 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: > Pete, > > As we are doing a dance with another standards organization, and as this > is a functioning piece of work used throughout the Internet, I would be > very careful about accepting other changes, and I would suggest that the > bar be set high. In this respect, I'd encourage the removal of the > ambiguity. > > Eliot I strongly agree with Eliot. From stpeter@stpeter.im Thu May 30 09:19:57 2013 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 27E1121F9702; Thu, 30 May 2013 09:19:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iAqGRWr8-l5N; Thu, 30 May 2013 09:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EC7D21F970B; Thu, 30 May 2013 09:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [24.8.129.242]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 871EB41111; Thu, 30 May 2013 10:32:43 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51A77C26.8080404@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:19:50 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Douglas Crockford References: <20130530045440.13528.48061.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <51A6FB37.80801@cisco.com> <51A77B6B.5000607@crockford.com> In-Reply-To: <51A77B6B.5000607@crockford.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Pete Resnick , The IESG , Eliot Lear , json@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Json] Pete Resnick's Yes on charter-ietf-json-00-01: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\)." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:19:57 -0000 On 5/30/13 10:16 AM, Douglas Crockford wrote: > On 5/30/2013 12:09 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: >> Pete, >> >> As we are doing a dance with another standards organization, and as this >> is a functioning piece of work used throughout the Internet, I would be >> very careful about accepting other changes, and I would suggest that the >> bar be set high. In this respect, I'd encourage the removal of the >> ambiguity. >> >> Eliot > I strongly agree with Eliot. +1 Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Fri May 31 09:01:26 2013 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 F1C2421F96F5; Fri, 31 May 2013 09:01:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.557 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.557 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ig-rgFSU5LYU; Fri, 31 May 2013 09:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 498B221F9925; Fri, 31 May 2013 09:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.50 Message-ID: <20130531160113.26831.10372.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 09:01:13 -0700 Cc: json WG Subject: [Json] WG Action: Formed JavaScript Object Notation (json) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:01:26 -0000 A new IETF working group has been formed in the Applications Area. For additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. JavaScript Object Notation (json) ------------------------------------------------ Current Status: Proposed WG Chairs: Matthew Miller Paul Hoffman Assigned Area Director: Barry Leiba Mailing list Address: json@ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/ Charter: Javascript Object Notation (JSON) is a lightweight, text-based, language-independent data interchange format. It was derived from the ECMAScript Programming Language Standard and was published in RFC 4627, an Informational document. JSON has come into very broad use, often instead of or in addition to XML. RFC 4627 cites a 1999 version of the ECMAScript Language Specification. However, since the publication of RFC 4627, the ECMA specifications have turned the relationship around, and themselves cite RFC 4627 as the documentation for JSON. A number of Standards Track IETF specifications have also cited RFC 4627, and more are in development (for example, the work in the JOSE working group). It makes sense to move RFC 4627 onto the Standards Track. There are also a number of other JSON-related proposals for Standards Track that would benefit from review from both the IETF and the larger JSON-using communities created by a working group focused on JSON. The JSON working group will have as its only initial task the minor revision of RFC 4627 to bring it onto the Standards Track. As noted above, RFC 4627 is a mature and widely cited specification. The work is essentially a reclassification in place, with minimal changes. The working group will review errata and update the document as needed to incorporate those, and will correct significant errors and inconsistencies, but will keep changes to a minimum. It is acknowledged that there are differences between RFC 4627 and the ECMAScript specification in the rules for parsing JSON. Any changes that break compatibility with existing implementations of either RFC 4627 or the ECMAScript specification will need to have very strong justification and broad support. All differences between RFC 4627 or the current ECMAScript specification will be documented in the new RFC. This documentation will include both the WG consensus for the rationale of the changes and the expected impact of the changes. The resulting document will be jointly published as an RFC and by ECMA. ECMA participants will be participating in the working group editing through the normal process of working group participation. The responsible AD will coordinate the approval process with ECMA so that the versions of the document that are approved by each body are the same. There are also various proposals for JSON extensions and related standards. The working group will consider those proposals only after the initial work is done, and must recharter with specific work items for any additional work it might select. Milestones: Jan 2014 - Request publication of JSON specification From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Fri May 31 09:33:08 2013 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 B9A7A21F87CD; Fri, 31 May 2013 09:33:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tDDOde+08yxX; Fri, 31 May 2013 09:33:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8035021F85E0; Fri, 31 May 2013 09:33:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IESG Secretary To: IETF Announcement List X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.50 Message-ID: <20130531163301.31268.54020.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 09:33:01 -0700 Cc: json@ietf.org Subject: [Json] Corrected: WG Action: Formed JavaScript Object Notation (json) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:33:08 -0000 A new IETF working group has been formed in the Applications Area. For additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. JavaScript Object Notation (json) ------------------------------------------------ Current Status: Proposed WG Chairs: Matthew Miller Paul Hoffman Assigned Area Director: Pete Resnick Mailing list Address: json@ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/ Charter: Javascript Object Notation (JSON) is a lightweight, text-based, language-independent data interchange format. It was derived from the ECMAScript Programming Language Standard and was published in RFC 4627, an Informational document. JSON has come into very broad use, often instead of or in addition to XML. RFC 4627 cites a 1999 version of the ECMAScript Language Specification. However, since the publication of RFC 4627, the ECMA specifications have turned the relationship around, and themselves cite RFC 4627 as the documentation for JSON. A number of Standards Track IETF specifications have also cited RFC 4627, and more are in development (for example, the work in the JOSE working group). It makes sense to move RFC 4627 onto the Standards Track. There are also a number of other JSON-related proposals for Standards Track that would benefit from review from both the IETF and the larger JSON-using communities created by a working group focused on JSON. The JSON working group will have as its only initial task the minor revision of RFC 4627 to bring it onto the Standards Track. As noted above, RFC 4627 is a mature and widely cited specification. The work is essentially a reclassification in place, with minimal changes. The working group will review errata and update the document as needed to incorporate those, and will correct significant errors and inconsistencies, but will keep changes to a minimum. It is acknowledged that there are differences between RFC 4627 and the ECMAScript specification in the rules for parsing JSON. Any changes that break compatibility with existing implementations of either RFC 4627 or the ECMAScript specification will need to have very strong justification and broad support. All differences between RFC 4627 or the current ECMAScript specification will be documented in the new RFC. This documentation will include both the WG consensus for the rationale of the changes and the expected impact of the changes. The resulting document will be jointly published as an RFC and by ECMA. ECMA participants will be participating in the working group editing through the normal process of working group participation. The responsible AD will coordinate the approval process with ECMA so that the versions of the document that are approved by each body are the same. There are also various proposals for JSON extensions and related standards. The working group will consider those proposals only after the initial work is done, and must recharter with specific work items for any additional work it might select. Milestones: Jan 2014 - Request publication of JSON specification From mamille2@cisco.com Fri May 31 10:28:23 2013 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 C9C5421F85BF for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 10:28:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2x91-azTUaFz for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B26221F8517 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8922; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1370021298; x=1371230898; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=jrerX5Tlfqa9twkTLwXjMQXdhcunEbW/K36UQTlj0OQ=; b=GBvtkF20WMY6Z92bfAaxWWwDM+/9tSG7oJeSEg+zwe8m7biZo+dNZvfD sPaBEDFdOWhhkmMEBZhI0ctPK4Zi7VJYPzj5zrY8uZ2RrfRQ7nGd2LEJj LgyhMvvKu/R00DtJPB5giTVZEZofwtAzib4V7JIGP2B/8dsxQkwYF1UDr 4=; X-Files: smime.p7s : 4136 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlEFACTdqFGtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABagwm/HoECFnSCJQEEHUgJCxIBKiYwJwQODQaHf7pLjnAxgn1hA5AAgSyCQZURgw+CJw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,780,1363132800"; d="p7s'?scan'208";a="214342846" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 May 2013 17:28:17 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com [173.36.12.87]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4VHSHqG000497 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 31 May 2013 17:28:17 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com ([169.254.6.176]) by xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com ([173.36.12.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 31 May 2013 12:28:17 -0500 From: "Matt Miller (mamille2)" To: "" Thread-Topic: A word from the Chairs Thread-Index: AQHOXiQ8uEkLdb4RPkqxttzVzX5OLQ== Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 17:28:16 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.129.24.59] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D30298F3-26D2-4B10-99C4-023F8883A5F3"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Paul Hoffman , "Matt Miller \(mamille2\)" Subject: [Json] A word from the Chairs X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Fri, 31 May 2013 17:28:23 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_D30298F3-26D2-4B10-99C4-023F8883A5F3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Welcome everyone! The JSON WG currently has just one task in its charter: the minor = revision of RFC 4627 to bring it onto the Standards Track. This is = essentially a reclassification in place, with minimal changes. The WG = will correct significant errors and inconsistencies, but will keep = changes to a minimum. =46rom the earlier discussion in the BoF and on the mailing list, there = is likely to be differences of opinion of what =93keep changes to a = minimum=94 means for various proposed changes. The WG chairs want to = have a process that facilitates open discussion without judgement of = whether or not a particular proposal meets the charter requirement too = early in the process. This needs to be balanced against having the WG = get bogged down in discussions of changes that few people support. WG members can say during the discussion or during the consensus calls = if they think a proposed change is outside the charter=92s mandate to = =93keep changes to a minimum=94 as well as whether they think a proposed = change is technically sound. Our intention is to conduct the discussion as follows: - WG members bring up proposed changes on the mailing list. These = proposals need to include specific intended wording changes to the = current-at-that-time draft, but the wording can change during the = discussion. It is expected that many topics will be being discussed = simultaneously. - When the discussion of a topic has died down, the WG chairs will nudge = the list for any remaining discussion. - When that discussion has died down, the WG chairs will issue a formal = call for consensus on the specific wording. The call will always have at = least two choices: =93leave the document as-is=94 and one or more sets = of wording changes. The intention is that there is no discussion during = the consensus call, just people stating their own opinions. There may be = more than one consensus call on different topics running at the same = time. - After a consensus call that results in changes to the draft is = complete, the WG chairs will ask the authors to issue a new draft = quickly. This will facilitate the WG knowing what the state of the = document is at any time. - If any consensus call has fewer than five responses, the WG chairs = will not consider the proposal to have consensus, and no changes to the = document will be made. WG members are free to raise the proposal again = later, following the same guidelines as above. If a WG member has proposed a change with specific wording and the WG = chairs have not acted as stated above, that person should nudge the WG = chairs in order to keep the discussion fresh and to have the consensus = calls come close in time to the main discussion. Thank you, Matt Miller and Paul Hoffman= --Apple-Mail=_D30298F3-26D2-4B10-99C4-023F8883A5F3 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIMezCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICAR4wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDE1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMcJg8zOLdgasSmkLhOrlr6KMoOMpohBllVHrdRvEg/q6r8jR+EK 75xCGhR8ToREoqe7zM9/UnC6TS2y9UKTpT1v7RSMzR0t6ndl0TWBuUr/UXBhPk+Kmy7bI4yW4urC +y7P3/1/X7U8ocb8VpH/Clt+4iq7nirMcNh6qJR+xjOhV+VHzQMALuGYn5KZmc1NbJQYclsGkDxD z2UbFqE2+6vIZoL+jb9x4Pa5gNf1TwSDkOkikZB1xtB4ZqtXThaABSONdfmv/Z1pua3FYxnCFmdr /+N2JLKutIxMYqQOJebr/f/h5t95m4JgrM3Y/w7YX9d7YAL9jvN4SydHsU6n65cCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRTcu2SnODaywFc fH6WNU7y1LhRgjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBAAqDCH14qywG XLhjjF6uHLkjd02hcdh9hrw+VUsv+q1eeQWB21jWj3kJ96AUlPCoEGZ/ynJNScWy6QMVQjbbMXlt UfO4n4bGGdKo3awPWp61tjAFgraLJgDk+DsSvUD6EowjMTNx25GQgyYJ5RPIzKKR9tQW8gGK+2+R HxkUCTbYFnL6kl8Ch507rUdPPipJ9CgJFws3kDS3gOS5WFMxcjO5DwKfKSETEPrHh7p5shuuNktv sv6hxHTLhiMKX893gxdT3XLS9OKmCv87vkINQcNEcIIoFWbP9HORz9v3vQwR4e3ksLc2JZOAFK+s sS5XMEoznzpihEP0PLc4dCBYjbvSD7kxgDwZ+Aj8Q9PkbvE9sIPP7ON0fz095HdThKjiVJe6vofq +n6b1NBc8XdrQvBmunwxD5nvtTW4vtN6VY7mUCmxsCieuoBJ9OlqmsVWQvifIYf40dJPZkk9YgGT zWLpXDSfLSplbY2LL9C9U0ptvjcDjefLTvqSFc7tw1sEhF0n/qpA2r0GpvkLRDmcSwVyPvmjFBGq Up/pNy8ZuPGQmHwFi2/14+xeSUDG2bwnsYJQG2EdJCB6luQ57GEnTA/yKZSTKI8dDQa8Sd3zfXb1 9mOgSF0bBdXbuKhEpuP9wirslFe6fQ1t5j5R0xi72MZ8ikMu1RQZKCyDbMwazlHiMIIGPzCCBSeg AwIBAgIDBoRIMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRD b20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYG A1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0EwHhcN MTMwNDMwMjE1NDQyWhcNMTQwNTAyMDUzOTA0WjBbMRkwFwYDVQQNExBiN2F6NndOY0t0R3JtMEpF MRswGQYDVQQDDBJtYW1pbGxlMkBjaXNjby5jb20xITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEm1hbWlsbGUyQGNp c2NvLmNvbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAJbKBMsG+9UFTx9uq/bhhXgu vJvO8z7cwKaqqwZhVf5z/kHFyCNijtmTOE+YXjA8mWR4aoBwB5SvGypI/cJUofJ+AlBTC4g+RMx/ K0Ab4/jQqTQz9CDzMOB+Wm+rt8ZJ7A8ZzOJmNDAsf/VvB8l2A1SQz1UsAixgH16NTr8SlblAXEKk 4hwpCudUiNjjQokqJ0H686UBKVorcZSgXaza8XMqGtJF/8mNhR9GQYi7Xht1ky+9LFOrto2daZto KJRwMeVusVdHUeKEQSu7jztw8HchH3KEb7Q+r5X+hhDZoddfKE8d5eyPuhiZdrzv7OlNZ0fSLdx7 3AE3nx9/R5YlXucCAwEAAaOCAtgwggLUMAkGA1UdEwQCMAAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSwMB0GA1UdJQQW MBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUxGd+/qrdVudHrIKkw5xOMY7eaLUwHwYD VR0jBBgwFoAUU3Ltkpzg2ssBXHx+ljVO8tS4UYIwHQYDVR0RBBYwFIESbWFtaWxsZTJAY2lzY28u Y29tMIIBTAYDVR0gBIIBQzCCAT8wggE7BgsrBgEEAYG1NwECAzCCASowLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgfcGCCsGAQUFBwICMIHqMCcWIFN0YXJ0 Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQEagb5UaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIHdhcyBp c3N1ZWQgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIHRoZSBDbGFzcyAxIFZhbGlkYXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIG9m IHRoZSBTdGFydENvbSBDQSBwb2xpY3ksIHJlbGlhbmNlIG9ubHkgZm9yIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCBw dXJwb3NlIGluIGNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHJlbHlpbmcgcGFydHkgb2JsaWdhdGlvbnMuMDYG A1UdHwQvMC0wK6ApoCeGJWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NydHUxLWNybC5jcmwwgY4G CCsGAQUFBwEBBIGBMH8wOQYIKwYBBQUHMAGGLWh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9zdWIv Y2xhc3MxL2NsaWVudC9jYTBCBggrBgEFBQcwAoY2aHR0cDovL2FpYS5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY2Vy dHMvc3ViLmNsYXNzMS5jbGllbnQuY2EuY3J0MCMGA1UdEgQcMBqGGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRz c2wuY29tLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAlDhXbGEI7lbqUcu5r2JHZaMsbRZda/99ZqODzWGX 0llou9jGccsAWDPPwRRe2+ROpXfH4cuJZElTcLDeZSp/qpXKhjYieFSX8+Ml9sKEj5UOSqQLyoLk PtrIJV12Jk3nuG2Jc0UeEnGwK/aqtzy7+bfEVI0ziyVM2gChHh0RH74KyiwYWknbOTRIkZcz/ulE DVFQp63uj6wfmDNvAUHBAdhKVqA1S/rfP1KcDZpf1NfvwXJibiqTRA6K1EOxTJOP41n/XdvHqHXL RWL2xrOUI9/URANr/ok3OrsuZEMFnAAGefS1bWS/hFtUGVkHGiKEBbyDW7da2ULXbuC7umrQnzGC A28wggNrAgEBMIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkG A1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRD b20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAwaESDAJBgUrDgMCGgUA oIIBrzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0xMzA1MzExNzI4 MTZaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBQZ5WFbCBGNwaYLcrZOltejmM8VzzCBpQYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYGX MIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2Vj dXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYGA1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3Mg MSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0ECAwaESDCBpwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZeg gZQwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1 cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAx IFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQIDBoRIMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBACTJ 9LOf5PLR2Fsyl+MoEckmsV+SYxAcIIXNH8QdncJpPspgtgyzV82n6AmNVwLIJcgAYmdBx2MZ0wrA hXZ2NbMAiiFeF+L9EvhyEosNMJbwinBVl8cuVU0NCrN6ybj8t4fZzHYAwxfJoXkE0Tv8KE6oFqX+ 6j2semny0/Woli3Uzppv6GQRIcYTchV9JZSP8Z5hv25H389qH4JDGflRg1m5VU+oRi2vOF1kaylz KkefvL7DN0UOyC7++YunPCIgnmqByuk8vYONL3/WOkUhiUdtXL2GiaqHo3ZHU5wfk66VUF9/tD5q ku0LK6xF+UEyVFhafcdHCkbxAnMkXB2jl+EAAAAAAAA= --Apple-Mail=_D30298F3-26D2-4B10-99C4-023F8883A5F3-- From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Fri May 31 11:31:18 2013 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 4964821F86D5 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.733 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.733 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.866, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PxtaWnj74EjV for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 11:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A3221F8689 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 11:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-173.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.173]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4VIVGaa015703 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 11:31:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:31:16 -0700 To: "json@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Subject: [Json] Editor for draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:31:18 -0000 Greetings again. The add-on to what Matt just said is that Douglas = Crockford has volunteered to be editor of the -bis draft. He'll get the = -00 out soon, but it will look as close to RFC 4627 as possible so that = every diff is obvious. Please use that draft as the basis for your = proposed changes. Again: specific wording of proposed changes will help = focus the discussion and make the consensus calls much more definitive. --Paul Hoffman=