JSON Duplicate Keys

Sam Tobin-Hochstadt samth at ccs.neu.edu
Sun Jun 9 19:28:43 PDT 2013


On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Thanks, but that doesn't match what Yehuda said. If anything, it shows that
>> there is as widespread disagreement within TC39 as to what is a "breaking"
>> change with respect to duplicate names in objects as there so far is in the
>> JSON WG.
>
>
> The minutes Rick cited show no disagreement other than Doug (I missed this
> part of the March meeting). The "FTR: Majority opposition, no consensus"
> note, I believe, means that everyone but Doug agreed that an incompatible
> change was a bad idea, to be opposed.
>
> Is anything else unclear? Am I missing some other notes section? I do not
> see "widespread disagreement within TC39 as to what is a "breaking" change
> with respect to duplicate names in objects" in any of the "JSON, IETF
> changes" meeting notes text (cited below).

A quick skim of the IETF list also indicates that people are
discussing how characters in strings are treated, and I feel confident
in predicting that any change for the 16-bit number interpretation
that EcmaScript uses would be thought of as a breaking change by TC39.

Sam


More information about the es-discuss mailing list