Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON?

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Subject: Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON?
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:40:08 -0500

[...]

>> Not very well.  To understand JSON this way is extraordinarily difficult
>> and expensive, requiring deep knowledge of the innards of EMCAScript.
> 
> I had hoped it would a little, since it was in relation to multiple 
> "keys" with the same name and also confusion over that terminology in 
> relation to JSON, however, I guess it would be good to know how you see 
> this negatively impacting the JSON TF and JSON related work of the 
> group? Or specifically what are your current issues and how do they 
> affect the work we're planning/doing?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Nathan

Well, I, for one, find it hard to work on standardizing against anything
when I don't know the target.   And not just the general ideas of the
target, but also all the corner cases, etc., etc.

To pick a particular example, I was happy to see that http://json.org/
(which I thought would have been, if not definitive, at least quite
close to correct) allow for multiple values for the same pair name in JSON.
I was also not expecting to have the EMCAScript document be confused as
to how to handle multiple values for the same pair.

To pick another example, I wasn't expecting to see the relationship
between objects in JSON and objects in the host language to be so subject
to extra inflences.  (Not that the possibility of these extra influences
are bad per se, but they sure affect how I view JSON.)


So, I'm still confused as to exactly what JSON is.

peter

Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:50:57 UTC