W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal

From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 07:21:20 -0400
Message-ID: <20110406.072120.1889917296766017949.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Subject: Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 18:55:44 -0500

[...]

>>> There are currently three JSON grammar serializations, which one
>>> should this Working Group use as the basis for the RDF/JSON
>>> serialization:
>>> 
>>> * RFC4627: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt * ECMA-262 5th
>>> Edition:
>>> http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/ECMA-262.pdf
>>> * json.org: http://json.org/
>> 
>> How do they differ? Are there real world examples of collisions?
> 
> I thought that Peter asserted that they differ - I don't know how they
> differ. Perhaps an allusion to the backslash-escaping "/" when you don't
> need to?
> 
> -- manu

The details are blissfully receeding into my subconscious, but I seem to
remember something about certain non-ASCII UNICODE characters being
allowed unescaped in one but not in the other.

peter
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 11:22:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT