778Re: [json] Re: JSON -- rfc question -- Encoding
- Apr 13, 2007I have one more question, do I need to convert unicode characters to
something like "\u12345"?
On 13 Apr 2007 15:47:13 -0700, Douglas Crockford <douglas@...>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org <json%40yahoogroups.com>, "json_is_clever"
> <vendor@...> wrote:
> > The implementer claims that because Unicode is not a binary encoding,
> > but a set of codepoints, that this sentence means that Unicode
> > codepoints should be used in some manner to represent characters, but
> > that the bitstream that represents the JSON text could use escapes for
> > most of the characters (reducing the size of the character
> > repertoire), and then be encoded in, say, EBCDIC. While it is
> > possible to conceive of doing such a thing, I question if his
> > interpretation is valid.
> No, that is a wild misreading of the RFC. The JSON text must be
> represented in Unicode, and the preferred encoding is UTF-8.
> > 1) Must a conformant JSON parser recognize all legal encodings? Or
> > can a parser be conformant with documented restrictions on what
> > encodings it can accept?
> Parties can agree on what is acceptable and meaningful. For example,
> it is reasonable for a receiver to put limits on message length or
> string length or nesting depth.
> > 2) Is a conformant JSON generator allowed to have options to generate
> > text that is not quite JSON conformant? Or must it be completely
> > limited to producing JSON legal JSON text only?
> A JSON generator may only produce valid JSON text.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>