IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 14 February 2019 00:12 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 F307713109B; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 16:12:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 JpygLt2VfKbY; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 16:12:48 -0800 (PST)
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 EACBD131083; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 16:12:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost2.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c8:406a:91ff:fe74:f2b7]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x1E0Cc71003039; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:12:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.217.106] (p54A6CC50.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.166.204.80]) (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 440H056Dldz1Br6; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:12:37 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <6882FA6E-B656-4539-AB4D-CF9272B7A269@tzi.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:12:36 +0100
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, cbor@ietf.org, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, cbor-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-cbor-cddl@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 571795954.335708-d9ffabc5d684b9a29bad0493051c4d6f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6B4F5D27-0728-43A4-A154-EB5D90591543@tzi.org>
References: <154267838656.26631.4178048052675609107.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D99E5141-4C3E-475F-8F25-3018BBC2B484@tzi.org> <CABcZeBMb8nV-Bm1R3n9Dk-TyWZjwcOe7dxhAFfHaQRyPcBAROQ@mail.gmail.com> <6882FA6E-B656-4539-AB4D-CF9272B7A269@tzi.org>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/0fn61tG4vzc75MyB2Cdhj-ge-S4>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 14 Feb 2019 00:12:50 -0000

On Nov 21, 2018, at 14:10, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
>>> S 3.5.3.
>>>>                       mynumber = int / float
>>>> 
>>>> 3.5.3.  Non-deterministic order
>>>> 
>>>>    While the way arrays are matched is fully determined by the Parsing
>>>>    Expression Grammar (PEG) algorithm, matching is more complicated for
>>> 
>>> PEG is an informative reference, and this text seems to create a
>>> normative dependency.
>> 
>> Many of our specifications make use of theory in one form or another without needing a normative dependency to a textbook.
>> RFC 5234 does not even have a reference for BNF.  Since PEGs have been a staple for parsing theory only for less than 15 years, we thought a reference might be useful.
>> 
>> Then you need to rewrite this text, because here and below, it implies that I need to read PEG in order to understand this specification. 
> 
> That will be a bit more work than I can do today, so there will be a separate e-mail when that is done.

I’m sorry this took so long.  There is now a new Appendix A (normative) that defines the parts of PEG necessary for this specification:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-07#appendix-A
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-07.txt

The authors believe that this should complete the changes necessary to clear the DISCUSS; please advise of any more work needed and any COMMENTS we have not fully addressed yet.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email