Agreed. I will correct it in the errata
From: es5-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org [mailto:es5-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org]
On Behalf Of Mark S. Miller
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 11:03 PM
To: Brendan Eich
Cc: es-discuss; es5-disc...@mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Clarification needed on 10.2.1.1.3
There seems to be enough controversy about this, that it is reasonable to
clarify it a bit in the errata. There are two points that I think should be
covered:
First a normative statement at the end of the paragraph that begins The
mechanics and order...:
A property name must not be
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
allen.wirfs-br...@microsoft.com wrote:
There seems to be enough controversy about this, that it is reasonable to
clarify it a bit in the errata. There are two points that I think should be
covered:
I haven't observed controversy so much
On 6/3/09, Douglas Crockford doug...@crockford.com wrote:
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
JSON.parse([010])
should be an error, per spec. Nobody follows the spec though...
As I read them neither the RFC or the current ES5 JSON grammar recognize
[010] as a valid JSON form, so according to the ES5
(I'm going to try to shift this thread to the test262-discuss list, by bccing:
es-discuss.)
I think we all agree that a web based test runner is part of what we want to
have. It seems inevitable that some sort of pass % or similar score has to
display even though it's not clear whether such a
On 6/22/2010 5:28 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
Most of the questions on Grammar were answered in this thread,
however, the question of U+0009 as a JSONStringCharacter remains. All
major browsers allowi U+0009 in JSONString. What should the capability
test check? If all major browsers parse without
On Jun 22, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
On 6/22/2010 5:28 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
Most of the questions on Grammar were answered in this thread,
however, the question of U+0009 as a JSONStringCharacter remains. All
major browsers allowi U+0009 in JSONString. What should the
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
On 6/22/2010 5:28 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
Most of the questions on Grammar were answered in this thread,
however, the question of U+0009 as a JSONStringCharacter
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com wrote:
But that's the rub -- the JSON spec cannot be changed. It (intentionally) has
no version number. ECMA could superset it -- ES-JSON, if you will -- which
could
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com wrote:
But that's the rub -- the JSON spec cannot be changed. It (intentionally)
has no version number.
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Oliver Hunt wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com
wrote:
But that's the rub -- the JSON spec cannot be changed. It
(intentionally) has no version number. ECMA could superset
On Jun 22, 2010, at 8:17 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
There are countless JSON parsers in the wild -- likely 1 for almost every
obscure language in existence, not counting all the one-offs. Any number of
these were written with the expectation of not expecting control characters
-- not too
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 8:17 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
There are countless JSON parsers in the wild -- likely 1 for almost
every obscure language in existence, not counting all the one-offs. Any
number of these were written
On 6/22/10, Luke Smith lsm...@lucassmith.name wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Oliver Hunt wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com
wrote:
[...]
As far as I can tell, all the major browsers accept tabs, as
14 matches
Mail list logo
