Re: Precision of numbers using JSON Header Field Values

On 2016-07-15 09:22, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> --------
> In message <>, Julian Reschke writes
> :
>> 1) Mandate that all numeric values need to be transferred as strings
>> (loosing some of the benefits), or
>> 2) Require use of I-JSON (
>> generators/parsers (loosing lots of potential implementations).
> I-JSON is probably the better of those two alternatives, despite
> the fact that the restrictions it mandates can be very hard to
> implement correctly and efficiently (in particular the unicode
> restrictions).
> The 3. alternative which you didn't list gets my vote:
> 3) Don't use JSON.

I do not disagree with that. That's certainly an option. In that case 
we'd be discussing a textual format that can be shared across header 
fields, so that people at least can use a single parser.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Friday, 15 July 2016 07:29:02 UTC