Re: [Cbor] Status of CBOR CRS Specification

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Chris Lemmons <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > This leaves me with two options: define a new tag fit for precisely the
    > purpose I need, or see if there's interest in finishing the work that
    > was started with Tag 104. It does seem like having two tags, especially
    > with one in the low-numbered space, is not ideal.

    > The draft is here:
    > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clarke-cbor-crs/

    > For context, I need a CRS tag that can "wrap" other content to describe
    > the CRS for that which it encloses. I can define it as necessary, but
    > reuse is usually better. Is there any interest in picking up the work
    > of Tag 104? Is this even an appropriate venue for that?

I think that CBOR is the right place for this.
Try reaching out to the author, T.Clarke @ Ball.  If he doesn't have time to
pursue this document and make you a co-author, then we have the XML for it,
and could just take it over.  Once adopted, document authors serve at the
pleasure of the wg chairs, so changing authors isn't a problem.
(just have to give credit where it is due)

It's possible to do new tags in ~1 year as evidenced by RFC9164 and 9277.
(Actually, I think they could have happened even faster)

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-