Murray is exactly right. And, for what it's worth, the App Area has discussed moving 4627 to Standards Track.
The experimental shepherd writeup template is here: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DraftShepherdWriteupWgAlternate ...and I encourage shepherds to talk with your ADs about trying it out. On the other item, the point is that the "-" is syntactically correct and has the semantics specified in the first excerpt. But, as the second excerpt says, it references a non-existant array element, and so creates an "error" from the point of view of the JSON Pointer. It is, therefore, up to the use of the Pointer to say what this means. Some future uses might proceed to handle it as an error condition. JSON Patch defines it as a valid situation for the "add" operation, but an error for all other operations. Barry On Tuesday, January 8, 2013, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > HI Suresh, > > RFC4627 is already in the downref registry. See > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DownrefRegistry. > > The template used is a simplified one being tested by request of the IESG. > > I'll let the editors comment on the first question. > > -MSK > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 9:51 PM, Suresh Krishnan < > [email protected] <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > '[email protected]');>> wrote: > >> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) >> reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see >> http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). >> >> Please wait for direction from your document shepherd >> or AD before posting a new version of the draft. >> >> Document: draft-ietfdraft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-08.txt >> Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan >> Review Date: 2013/01/07 >> IESG Telechat date: 2013/01/10 >> >> Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as a Proposed >> Standard. I do have a minor comment that you may wish to address and a >> procedural point for the GEN AD to consider. >> >> Minor >> ===== >> >> * Section 4 >> >> The following two pieces of text seem contradictory to me. It is >> possible that I am just misunderstanding something. If this is the case, >> please let me know. >> >> "If the currently referenced value is a JSON array, the reference token >> MUST contain either: >> ... >> * exactly the single character "-", making the new referenced value >> the (non-existant) member after the last array element." >> >> Which seems to indicate that the character "-" is valid for use and this >> is followed by the following text at the end of the section >> >> " Note that the use of the "-" character to index an array will always >> result in such an error; applications of JSON Pointer thus need to >> specify how it is to be handled, if it is to be useful." >> >> which seems to indicate that this is an error condition. Can you please >> clarify? >> >> Procedural >> ========== >> >> * There is a downref to RFC4627 that has not been called out. I looked >> up the shepherd writeup at >> >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/management/shepherds/draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer/writeup/ >> >> and it curiously seems to be incomplete. Has there been an update to the >> shepherd writeup since Feb 2012. The last one I know of is at >> >> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/template/doc-writeup.html >> >> Thanks >> Suresh >> >> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
