[Cbor] Adam Roach's Block on charter-ietf-cbor-01-01: (with BLOCK)

Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 26 June 2019 03:59 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 A55A012061C; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: cbor-chairs@ietf.org, cbor@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.98.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <156152155760.31137.14743795939001646314.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:59:17 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/9DDvz39-t1Y9-rgc3bw7-bIw9Pk>
Subject: [Cbor] Adam Roach's Block on charter-ietf-cbor-01-01: (with BLOCK)
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: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 03:59:18 -0000

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-cbor-01-01: Block

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.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


This is a "DISCUSS-discuss" style block, in the spirit of backing up and making
sure we're making the right overall decision here.

I'd like us to have a short conversation about whether it makes sense for the
CDDL work to continue in the CBOR working group. Given that it has been
rescoped and renamed to be a more general-purpose schema language covering not
just CBOR, but the much broader JSON universe, it seems that this work is
extremely likely to have a broad constituency outside of those people who
typically participate in working groups that focus on IoT use-cases. Keeping it
part of CBOR does not seem to serve that community well.

Should we consider splitting the CDDL update and maintenance work off into a
separate working group, rather than rechartering CBOR with the rather
significant expansion considered in this charter proposal?