Carsten Bormann (2013-12-07T12:10:51.000Z)
On 07 Dec 2013, at 12:55, Nico Williams <nico at cryptonector.com> wrote:

> And we all now seem to agree
> that the ABNF in draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis-08 is equivalent to the
> syntax in ECMA-404.

Yes, we like to believe that.
The thing that worries me is that nobody knows whether that is actually true.

(At least I’d hope someone who is comfortable with the description methods in ECMA-404 makes a serious pass at establishing this equivalence, even when it’s ultimately not possible to actually prove it.  That someone will not be me.)

Grüße, Carsten
domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-12-10T01:00:58.766Z)
On 07 Dec 2013, at 12:55, Nico Williams <nico at cryptonector.com> wrote:

> And we all now seem to agree
> that the ABNF in draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis-08 is equivalent to the
> syntax in ECMA-404.

Yes, we like to believe that.
The thing that worries me is that nobody knows whether that is actually true.

(At least I’d hope someone who is comfortable with the description methods in ECMA-404 makes a serious pass at establishing this equivalence, even when it’s ultimately not possible to actually prove it.  That someone will not be me.)