On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 04:07:54PM -0500, John Cowan wrote: > However, I grant that mentioning UTF-8 only in an ABNF comment is not > really prominent enough. Proposed wording change: > > For: > > In prose: a series of octet strings, each containing any octet other > than a record separator (RS) (0x1E) [RFC0020], all octet strings > separated from each other by RS octets. Each octet string in the > sequence is to be parsed as a JSON text. > > read: > > In prose: a series of octet strings, each containing any octet other > than a record separator (RS) (0x1E) [RFC0020], all octet strings > separated from each other by RS octets. Each octet string in the > sequence is to be parsed as a JSON text in UTF-8 encoding. Agreed. And a corresponding change to section 2.2, which will now read: In prose: any number of JSON texts, each encoded in UTF-8, each preceded by one ASCII RS character, and each followed by a line feed (LF). Since RS ... > and add a suitable reference to UTF-8. Oh, eh, RFC7159 lacked such a thing. At least this one should be non-controversial: RFC3629. (Right? :) Nico --