[Cbor] Re: CBOR Tooling breadth of use

["A.J. Stein" <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 6:53 PM Steve Lasker <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Working with developers outside of IETF, adoption of CBOR has met
> resistance, …due to a lack of tooling. There have been various libraries
> starting to surface, for using CBOR in code, however the lack of
> visualization, editing, debugging is a limitation. It’s just too easy to
> open a json, yaml, (dare I say xml) files. To pass parameters, et.
>

It is easy to create software to deserialize and serialize "human-friendly"
markup languages and JSON (the others precisely have "ML" in their
initialism; is JSON one of them it depends on how you use it) that can deny
service to a system and be the primary or significant cause to compromise.
I do not want to make the email all about that, but I can compile a list of
issues around that.

How much energy and acknowledgement is there around CBOR and COSE tooling?
> Does the CBOR community feel it’s not intended as a general-purpose data
> format, and it’s good enough? Or, is there a desire to make easier for more
> to use?
>

You are part of this community by virtue of emailing. So we have energy and
acknowledgement with you, I, and Carsten just responded. What is good
enough? What do you desire? What can you I or commit to move the community
forward?