JSON parser grammar

Waldemar Horwat waldemar at google.com
Wed Jun 3 16:27:01 PDT 2009

Douglas Crockford wrote:
> Waldemar Horwat wrote:
>>> 2) Do we want to permit conforming implementations to extend the JSON 
>>> grammar that they recognize?  This probably could be done by 
>>> extending the syntax error extension allowance in section 16 to 
>>> include the JSON grammar.  If we allow this then most of the observed 
>>> variation for the current emerging implementation that we have been 
>>> talking about would probably be acceptable extensions.
> JSON is done. JSON will not be revised. Someday it might be replaced and
> that replacement will have a different name and likely a different model.
> Chapter 16 should not give a license to fiddle with the JSON grammar.

OK, so we need not discuss any new numeric types any further in committee because it would be impossible to round-trip them through JSON.  Do we have agreement on that?


More information about the es-discuss mailing list