Re: Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH

Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr):
> (As chair)
>
> JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group.  Please take
> your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an
> approach that can be adopted.

Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks the 
possibility to use comments (either to provide human readable 
descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate something)?

I would't call this out of scope. If you adopt POSH without providing 
(defining) a way how to add comments to the JSON definitions, this will 
be a serious flaw (in my humble opinion).

I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious problem 
of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like "comments may 
start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's adoption if the working 
group is going to adopt it. You might call it a "variant" of JSON.

Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for POSH and 
don't want to discuss JSON.

Regards,

Alexander Holler

>
>
> On 1/30/14 11:54 AM, "Alexander Holler" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Am 30.01.2014 10:13, schrieb Tobias Markmann:
>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler
>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I
>>> guess
>>> the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments.
>>
>> Thats why I said POSH should define how comments shpuld be defined.
>> Almost any JSON parser provides a syntax for comments (e.g. using # or
>> //) and I'm unable to understand why comments in JSON aren't standardized.
>>
>> And if I read the draft for POSH, e.g. setion 8. shows why one (human)
>> would like to have comments.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Alexander Holler
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmpp mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp
>>
>
>