- From: David I. Lehn <dil@lehn.org>
- Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 13:02:54 -0500
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>, Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: > On Thursday, March 06, 2014 5:14 PM, Thomas Steiner wrote: >> My preference would still be to swap to >> the new RFC, but nothing breaks if the spec references the old RFC. > > I think it's better to wait for the next version of JSON-LD to make that > change. Especially given that RFC7159's grammar [1] contains a very > problematic error: > > JSON-text = ws value ws > value = false / null / true / object / array / number / string > > This means that > > 3409 true 1949 false > > Would be valid according the grammar. But no current parser will be able to > interpret that. Then there's also the question what we really should > reference? RFC7159? Why not ECMA-404? > > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7158#section-2 > It's unclear what you meant there. The text "3409 true 1949 false" is still not valid JSON. The JSON-text definition is just saying you can now use any single value surrounded by whitespace as JSON rather than just arrays and objects. Your example wouldn't parse as it has multiple values more like "ws value ws value ws ... ws". -dave
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2014 18:03:21 UTC