Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 09:53:01AM -0700, Jim Schaad wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 9:41 AM
> > To: Felipe Gasper <[e-mail]>
> > Cc: Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>; Roman Danyliw <[e-mail]>;
> > Daniel Migault <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> > [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> > [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
> > 
> > On Apr 29, 2019, at 18:15, Felipe Gasper <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of key:
> > > a UTF-8 string. In CBOR, any valid CBOR item can be a map key.
> > > CWT uses signed and unsigned integers, in addition to UTF-8 strings,
> > > as map keys.
> > 
> > s/CBOR item/CBOR data item/ (this is the term we use in 7049)
> > 
> > Also, I think
> > s/UTF-8 string/text string/g
> > The fact that this is encoded in UTF-8 is somewhat on a different level of
> > detail.
> 
> +1 on this.  There is not really a restriction that UTF-8 strings be the key in JSON.  If you encoded the JSON as UTF-16 then it would be a UTF-16 string.

I think I'm also +1 on that, but do recall that RFC 8529 mandates UTF-8 for
exchange among a non-closed ecosystem (i.e., all internet usage).

-Ben