Yes, -11 is fine wrt my review: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg11048.html Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 8:45 AM > To: Patrik Fältström; Black, David > Cc: John Cowan; ops-dir@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; Paul Hoffman; Manger, James; > General Area Review Team (gen-art@xxxxxxxx) > Subject: Re: [Json] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text- > sequence-10 > > David -thank you for the review! > > My understanding of this thread and the -11 is that we are done with respect > to the modifications coming out of your review. Let me know otherwise. > > Thanks, all. > > Jari > > On 13 Dec 2014, at 02:02, Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > >> On 12 dec 2014, at 02:12, John Cowan <cowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Manger, James scripsit: > >> > >>> How about: > >>> > >>> "A JSON text sequence consists of any number of JSON texts, > >>> each prefixed by a Record Separator (U+001E) character, and > >>> each suffixed by an End of Line (U+000A) character. It is > >>> UTF-8 encoded." > >>> > >>> Say "Information Separator Two (U+001E)" if you really want to be pure. > >> > >> The trouble with that is that U+001E has no official Unicode name or > >> function; those come from ISO 6429, which is incorporated (in relevant > >> part) into US-ASCII, which is described in RFC 20. > > > > Although it does not have a Unicode Name, the alias is as close as we can > get, which is "INFORMATION SEPARATOR TWO": > > > > # grep ^001E UnicodeData.txt > > 001E;<control>;Cc;0;B;;;;;N;INFORMATION SEPARATOR TWO;;;; > > # > > > > So I suggest to use that. > > > > It is I think wrong to say "Record Separator" and then still reference the > Unicode Tables. > > > > Alternatively one just write (and make it more clear how this works, and > this is my understanding): > > > >> A JSON text sequence consists of any number of JSON texts, each prefixed by > U+001E character and each suffixed by U+000A. The JSON texts as well as the > whole JSON text sequence is encoded in UTF-8 although any JSON text might be > truncated and because of that not a valid UTF-8 sequence. Any occurance of the > UTF-8 encoding of U+001E (the byte 0x1E) is to be viewed as the first byte > before each JSON text, and occurrance of the byte 0x0A is to be viewed as the > first byte after a complete JSON text. If the JSON text is truncated, the 0x0A > byte will not be present. > > > > I.e. the grammar is sort of (before coffee in the morning): > > > > sequence := 0x1E text > > > > text := complete-text | truncated-text > > > > complete-text := proper-UTF8 0x0A > > > > truncated-text := proper-UTF8 broken-UTF8 > > > > proper-UTF8 := "" | "a sequence of bytes, possible to parse as a series of > UTF8 encoded Unicode characters" > > > > broken-UTF8 := "a sequence of bytes not possible to parse as a UTF8 encoded > unicode character" > > > > Patrik > >