Preliminary Community Review: text/json
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Fri Feb 10 03:53:34 CET 2006
At 09:14 06/02/10, Graham Klyne wrote:
>There is one other thing I noticed. The proposed MIME type is text/json. I
>think that, based on comments I have seen made previously, that application/json
>would be more appropriate. My understanding is that text/... is intended for
>textual information that is suitable for display to a general human audience;
>e.g., it has been suggested that text/html was a mistake, which should not be
I agree with Graham and others. I have looked at the spec. The fact
that it contains 'text' 12 times, but 'application' 0 times is a result
of the particular use of the word 'text' in the spec, which does not
match the use of the word 'text' in MIME types.
One additional comment regarding section 3, encodings. The spec says:
JSON text SHOULD be encoded in Unicode. The default encoding is
Since the first two characters of a JSON text will always be ASCII
characters [RFC-0020], it is possible to determine if an octet stream
is UTF-8, UTF-16 (BE or LE), or UTF-32 (BE or LE) by looking at the
pattern of nulls in the first four octets.
00 00 00 xx UTF-32BE
00 xx 00 xx UTF-16BE
xx 00 00 00 UTF-32LE
xx 00 xx 00 UTF-16LE
xx xx xx xx UTF-8
This is almost okay. What is unclear is whether other encodings
(e.g. iso-8859-1) are okay or not. If they are okay, that should be
said, and it should be explained how they can be identified.
If they are not okay, that should be said, too. I'd prefer that.
Simply adding a sentence saying something like "Other encodings
than UTF-8, UTF-16BE, UTF-16LE, UTF-32BE or UTF-32LE MUST NOT
be used." should be okay.
It may also be worth to clarify that BOMs/encoding signatures
are not allowed.
More information about the Ietf-types