ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Json] draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-03: recommendation to use UTF-8

2017-07-18 06:18:36
Alexey,

I believe Julian and Barry's notes constitute an appeal of the Protocol Action, and I think they're probably right. Please rescind it, publish the new draft, and give people a bit to review. No need for another formal LC, but doing this in a note to the RFC Editor isn't kosher.

pr

On 18 Jul 2017, at 13:04, Barry Leiba wrote:

I have to agree with Julian here: this is not a change that's
appropriate to do in an RFC Editor note.  The change is probably fine,
but draft revisions are cheap and it's easy enough to post a revised
I-D to make sure we can all see the final version in context.

Thanks,
Barry


On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Julian Reschke <julian(_dot_)reschke(_at_)gmx(_dot_)de> wrote:
On 2017-07-18 10:05, Alexey Melnikov wrote:

Hi Julian,

On 18 Jul 2017, at 08:52, Julian Reschke <julian(_dot_)reschke(_at_)gmx(_dot_)de> wrote:

On 2017-07-17 18:33, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Hi,
The JSONBIS WG decided to update recommendation on Unicode encoding to
be UTF-8. (For details see the RFC Editor's notes in the approval
message that will be sent out shortly.) This took a bit of time to
debate in the WG, so the document approval took a bit longer than
originally expected.
Best Regards,
Alexey, as the responsible AD


The last WG mail related to this topic is over 2 months old, and I don't
see any declaration of consensus.

It would be good if the chair would send a summary about what's going on
to the WG mailing list before anything gets finalized.

(I note that
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis/> has been saying "Revised ID Needed" for 48 days, and I was under the assumption that
there'd be indeed a revised ID).


I just posted a message on this: this is approved with updated RFC Editor
notes. See the approval message once it is sent.
...


This is not how it's supposed to work. Please have a new I-D posted and get people to review the changes in context. This is a *very* important piece of
standards work - we need to make sure it meets quality standards.

From a quick glance at
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis/writeup/>, I already note that the appendix "Changes from RFC 7159" is now incomplete.

Best regards, Julian

_______________________________________________
json mailing list
json(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json