Subject: Re: [Json] Questions regarding the text model in 4627

From: Larry Masinter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:56:08 -0700

It is a requirement to support all of these perspectives .... and the specification should be explicit.

The URI spec (and IRI after) were not and it led to no end of problems.

Sent from mobile Larry
--
http://larry.masinter.net

Pete Resnick <[email-masked]> wrote:

This is not *specifically* about the issue of json strings, though the
answers here will certainly inform that discussion.

What do you believe is the theoretical model of 4627 regarding the
characters that make up JSON objects? The question is not the original
design intention of the authors, but rather about how you see the model
in how you (or others) are using the document. So:

     a) Is it a stream of theoretical characters interpreted as JSON
objects? Or:

     b) Is it a stream of integers, interpreted as characters, and then
interpreted as JSON objects?
         b') If it is a stream of integers, is there an upper limit on
the value of those integers in a JSON object? (Interesting choices
include 255, 65535, 4294967295. 32767 would be an example of an
*extremely* interesting choice.) Or:

     c) Is it a stream of (8-bit/16-bit-/32-bit) words, interpreted as
characters, and then interpreted as JSON objects?

If you don't understand the distinction between any of the above
choices, that's also an interesting piece of information.

I look forward to your answers.

pr

--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478

_______________________________________________
json mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json