Re: [Cbor] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9277 (7144)

So what is the next step to get this one verified/HFDU?

Grüße, Carsten

> On 2022-10-04, at 17:10, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> On 2022-10-04, at 16:57, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Indeed, this looks almost right, but I think the correction is meant
>> to be "[RFC 8742]".  Carsten, Michael?
> 
> No, really, the reference was to Section 2.3 (“2.3.  Enveloping Method: Labeled CBOR Sequence”, which certainly uses RFC 8742, but describes a specific way to use it):
> 
> OLD:
>   As with the Labeled CBOR Sequence {#sequences}, this choice of the
>   tag content places the ASCII characters "CBOR" prominently into the
>   header.
> 
> NEW:
>   As with the Labeled CBOR Sequence (Section 2.3), this choice of the
>   tag content places the ASCII characters "CBOR" prominently into the
>   header.
> 
> (In kramdown-rfc, in some places {#sequences} is an anchor, and {{sequences}} would have been the reference to that…  Ouch.  Yours truly introduced this bug on 2022-04-20, which BTW is a calendar date that fills Germans with horror…)
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> 
>> Barry
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 10:49 AM RFC Errata System
>> <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9277,
>>> "On Stable Storage for Items in Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)".
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7144
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Type: Editorial
>>> Reported by: Thomas Fossati <thomas.fossati@arm.com>
>>> 
>>> Section: Appendix D
>>> 
>>> Original Text
>>> -------------
>>> {#sequences}
>>> 
>>> Corrected Text
>>> --------------
>>> (Section 2.3)
>>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CBOR mailing list
> CBOR@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor