Re: [Cbor] CBOR tag IANA registration request

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

Hi Anders,

> On 2023-03-03, at 08:24, Anders Rundgren <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On 2023-03-03 7:32, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> On 3. Mar 2023, at 03:46, Anders Rundgren <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Would it be possible to process this request?
>> Sure.
> 
> Good, when could that happen?

Once you fill in the form at https://www.iana.org/form/protocol-assignment

>> The specification would be improved if it could make up its mind whether the id is an object identifier or a type identifier.
>> (Both can be useful.)
> 
> Just for my information, is this the difference you refer to?
> 
> Object ID: Object instance ID, unrelated to the type/structure of the CBOR data item.
> 
> Object Type: Identifier associatd with the actual definition/structure of the object (CBOR data item).
> 
> Although both are useful, the intention was making COTX holding Object Type. Instance IDs are usually a part of the object (CBOR data item) itself.

Good.  I was somewhat expecting that, but the text oscillates between “type identifier” and “object identifier”; maybe you should bring this in line by consistently using “object type identifier” or some such.

Oh, and I would be excited if in the IANA Considerations table you could specify the type as

array [id: text, obj: any]

(This should be readable even if you don’t know CDDL.)

Grüße, Carsten