Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group Adoption for draft-greevenbosch-appsawg-cbor-cddl
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 20 July 2017 14:26 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E323413146E for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:26:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id foknlHSSkT2N for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:26:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 786471288B8 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:26:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6KEPunE016918; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:25:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from dhcp-808c.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-808c.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.128.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3xCx5c38NVz3ZB6; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:25:56 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <774331C9-367B-45D6-B4DC-ED36D2589D17@seantek.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:25:55 +0200
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "cbor@ietf.org" <cbor@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 522253555.610408-16eaa010803bceb4d07110e2bc43b13c
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DECF6295-56D6-42FD-AF8A-B5319A38A408@tzi.org>
References: <HE1PR0701MB25390DA8E0A1BEDE50EF206D98D40@HE1PR0701MB2539.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <2FBE4C5B-2661-437A-883F-4F6E7FFBF204@seantek.com> <432f706c-dfab-0dd9-60c5-f761a1a95f67@gmail.com> <6B06F9C0-8002-4FB6-AF01-8C049C0FE7BB@seantek.com> <C14E4B01-C496-458B-9458-A131B36CCA8A@tzi.org> <774331C9-367B-45D6-B4DC-ED36D2589D17@seantek.com>
To: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/-V5mR4GQsW9YTebz5v63J-hhB7c>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group Adoption for draft-greevenbosch-appsawg-cbor-cddl
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation \(CBOR\)" <cbor.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cbor/>
List-Post: <mailto:cbor@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 14:26:07 -0000
On Jul 20, 2017, at 16:22, Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com> wrote: > > That was not my full quote. I wrote: “For now, you can precisely define your CBOR message format using prose. Or you can use some combination of CDDL and prose. Just reference CDDL informatively.” Since that is what the current CDDL draft itself says: “The matter in how far the data description must be enforced by an application is left to the designers and implementers of that application […].” Which variation includes the use of CDDL as the exact specification of the data exchanged. For this to be possible, the CDDL language spec must be standards track or downref-enabled informational. The latter is a bit circuitous — if the point is being normative, we might as well make it standards track. Grüße, Carsten
- [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group Adop… Francesca Palombini
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Jeffrey Yasskin
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Michael Richardson
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Henk Birkholz
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Matthew A. Miller
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Kepeng Li
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Sean Leonard
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Matthew A. Miller
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Sean Leonard
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Sean Leonard
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Brian E Carpenter
- [Cbor] Does CDDL need to be standards track to be… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Cbor] Does CDDL need to be standards track t… Sean Leonard
- Re: [Cbor] Does CDDL need to be standards track t… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Cbor] Does CDDL need to be standards track t… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Cbor] Does CDDL need to be standards track t… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Cbor] 🔔 Confirmation call for Working Group … Francesca Palombini
- Re: [Cbor] Does CDDL need to be standards track t… Jim Schaad