Hi Tim,
thanks for considering, please see inline.
Best Regards,
Meral
On 01/22/2015 06:13 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
<editor-hat>
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Meral Shirazipour
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Nits/editorial comments:
-Please spell out acronyms at first use. E.g. JSON, I-JSON
I disagree. People know what JSON stands for, and for those who
don’t spelling it out wouldn’t help. De facto, the name of the format
is JSON. Also, the mention of JavaScript is a red herring.
I agree for JSON, but I-JSON I had to look it up.
-[Page 3], "treat an integer", it would be good to mention this is
still referring to IEEE754 format.
I disagree. It’s talking about the sequence of digits in the I-JSON
text, irrespective of any binary format.
was not clear to me, thanks for clarifying.
-[Page 3],"(one example would be 64-bit integers)", here not clear
if still IEEE7544 is discussed or integer format. If latter, is it
signed/unsigned.
"RECOMMENDED to encode them in JSON string values." should this be
done in decimal format then?
I think this has been discussed elsewhere on teh thread. It’s
irritating that 64-bit integers would be string-encoded even though
most computers can handle them in hardware, but it is a real plus for
interoperability. Anyhow, the place where this advice really applies
is for huge crypto integers.
yes, that part of the text was not clear to me. For a standards track
RFC it may be worth taking another look at it.
-[Page 4], Section 3, "in the JSON messages it receives."--->"in
the JSON messages they receives."
er, “er, they receive’. Yup.
-[Page 4], "receiving implementation"---->"receiving implementations"
Yup.
Best Regards,
Meral
---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson
Research
www.ericsson.com <http://www.ericsson.com>
--
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
