- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 13:14:49 +1000
- To: "public-ietf-w3c@w3.org" <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>
FYI. Begin forwarded message: > From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> > Subject: [Json] WG Action: Formed JavaScript Object Notation (json) > Date: 1 June 2013 2:01:13 AM AEST > To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org> > Cc: json WG <json@ietf.org> > > A new IETF working group has been formed in the Applications Area. For > additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG > Chairs. > > JavaScript Object Notation (json) > ------------------------------------------------ > Current Status: Proposed WG > > Chairs: > Matthew Miller <mamille2@cisco.com> > Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> > > Assigned Area Director: > Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> > > Mailing list > Address: json@ietf.org > To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/ > > Charter: > > Javascript Object Notation (JSON) is a lightweight, text-based, > language-independent data interchange format. It was derived from the > ECMAScript Programming Language Standard and was published in RFC 4627, > an Informational document. JSON has come into very broad use, often > instead of or in addition to XML. > > RFC 4627 cites a 1999 version of the ECMAScript Language Specification. > However, since the publication of RFC 4627, the ECMA specifications have > turned the relationship around, and themselves cite RFC 4627 as the > documentation for JSON. A number of Standards Track IETF specifications > have also cited RFC 4627, and more are in development (for example, the > work in the JOSE working group). > > It makes sense to move RFC 4627 onto the Standards Track. There are > also a number of other JSON-related proposals for Standards Track that > would benefit from review from both the IETF and the larger JSON-using > communities created by a working group focused on JSON. > > The JSON working group will have as its only initial task the minor > revision of RFC 4627 to bring it onto the Standards Track. As noted > above, RFC 4627 is a mature and widely cited specification. The work is > essentially a reclassification in place, with minimal changes. The > working group will review errata and update the document as needed to > incorporate those, and will correct significant errors and > inconsistencies, but will keep changes to a minimum. > > It is acknowledged that there are differences between RFC 4627 and the > ECMAScript specification in the rules for parsing JSON. Any changes that > break compatibility with existing implementations of either RFC 4627 or > the ECMAScript specification will need to have very strong justification > and broad support. All differences between RFC 4627 or the current > ECMAScript specification will be documented in the new RFC. This > documentation will include both the WG consensus for the rationale of > the changes and the expected impact of the changes. > > The resulting document will be jointly published as an RFC and by ECMA. > ECMA participants will be participating in the working group editing > through the normal process of working group participation. The > responsible AD will coordinate the approval process with ECMA so that > the versions of the document that are approved by each body are the > same. > > There are also various proposals for JSON extensions and related > standards. The working group will consider those proposals only after > the initial work is done, and must recharter with specific work items > for any additional work it might select. > > Milestones: > Jan 2014 - Request publication of JSON specification > > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 1 June 2013 03:15:14 UTC