[Cbor] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-07: (with COMMENT)

Martin Vigoureux via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 30 September 2019 09:11 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietf.org
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB7D120046; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 02:11:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Vigoureux via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags@ietf.org, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, cbor-chairs@ietf.org, francesca.palombini@ericsson.com, cbor@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.103.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>
Message-ID: <156983470369.421.522190451758642783.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 02:11:43 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/8xo81I7E6coNR0GFS9eFxB7hkj8>
Subject: [Cbor] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-07: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 09:11:44 -0000

Martin Vigoureux has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

thank you for this document. I have a minor question.

   IEEE 754 binary floating numbers are always signed.  Therefore, for
   the float variants ("f" == 1), there is no need to distinguish
   between signed and unsigned variants; the "s" bit is always zero.
Since IEEE 754 binary floating numbers are always signed, I would have thought
that s=1 would be used in conjunction with f=1. For my understanding, what was
the reason for choosing s=0 instead?

Thank you