| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: JSON docs: RFC7159 is now superceded |
| Date: | 2022-04-13 14:02:45 |
| Message-ID: | 586f96e8-1e4e-8e80-1446-cf10d9ec598e@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-04-13 We 09:38, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Minor doc patch to replace with latest RFC number
>
> Intended for PG15
Idea is fine, but
- data, as specified in <ulink
url="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159">RFC
- 7159</ulink>. Such data can also be stored as <type>text</type>, but
+ data, as specified in <ulink
url="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259">RFC
+ 8259</ulink>, which supercedes the earlier <acronym>RFC</acronym> 7159.
+ Such data can also be stored as <type>text</type>, but
Do we need to mention the obsoleting of RFC7159? Anyone who cares enough
can see that by looking at the RFC - it mentions what it obsoletes.
I haven't checked that anything that changed in RFC8259 affects us. I
doubt it would but I guess we should double check.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-04-13 14:19:30 | Re: deparsing utility commands |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2022-04-13 14:02:41 | Re: JSON docs: RFC7159 is now superceded |