FWIW, I think this is a good view. I just felt that given the other discussion about RFC20, you do not HAVE TO talk about ASCII or the name of the code point in the standard. Sure, that is the reason you picked U+001E, but that is more a nice story ;-) It was not my intention to say that you should not talk about ASCII. Patrik > On 8 Dec 2014, at 08:37, Tim Bray <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I agree 100% that the fact that JSON Text Sequences MUST BE UTF-8 should be highlighted. Both the ASCII and Unicode names of 30/0x1e/00011110 should, for completeness, be provided. It would be inappropriate to omit ASCII, because we picked 0x1e because of its ASCII name. > > On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 8 dec 2014, at 03:59, Black, David <david.black@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > OLD > > In prose: any number of JSON texts, each preceded by one ASCII RS > > character and each followed by a line feed (LF). > > NEW > > In prose: any number of JSON texts encoded as UTF-8, each preceded > > by one ASCII RS character and each followed by a line feed (LF). > > > > My point is that you do not have to talk about ASCII RS. You can as well talk about the UTF-8 encoding of the unicode character INFORMATION SEPARATOR TWO, U+001E. Much cleaner. > > Just say it must be UTF-8 encoded text, done. > > Patrik > > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > > > > > -- > - Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see https://keybase.io/timbray)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail