IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] Encoding Arbitrary Time Ratios

Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com> Mon, 05 April 2021 23:37 UTC

Return-Path: <lgl@island-resort.com>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42613A2CA9 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 16:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.916
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.916 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RQxeechEjCrf for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 16:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa07-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa07-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CBF53A2CA7 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 16:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.81] ([76.167.193.86]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA id TYmclN7A1ukyLTYmdlE4Ks; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 16:37:27 -0700
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=Od9dsjfY c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=606b9f37 a=t2DvPg6iSvRzsOFYbaV4uQ==:117 a=t2DvPg6iSvRzsOFYbaV4uQ==:17 a=QyXUC8HyAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=53xPHaCqQ9RSo-jqpZQA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Vpng8tuhqNti8GUUIpgA:9 a=MCRB6UTkycLNzvnJ:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: lgl@island-resort.com
From: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
Message-Id: <F01F4733-E2B3-471A-AD9C-A3C4CD34446F@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1C39E431-AC0D-4DD8-B673-6896B186ADC7"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\))
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2021 16:37:26 -0700
In-Reply-To: <2096114.vpHZ4K6Zy5@tjmaciei-mobl1>
Cc: Emile Cormier <emile.cormier.jr@gmail.com>, cbor@ietf.org
To: Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@intel.com>
References: <CAM70yxBF2XeewhsXOGv06kTVitz1kNHkYLHGqm3gX0Vyc2c2YA@mail.gmail.com> <2403465.MzrCfxQRY8@tjmaciei-mobl1> <CAM70yxAvoZmURMZHNY3-pKceU0mPbny=-QRAEeEzM2P0pcYrAg@mail.gmail.com> <2096114.vpHZ4K6Zy5@tjmaciei-mobl1>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfLLHW8umYk2aJhYoHYptpCtb1E7giLe0EjWdgkGGyLNPP2A86fd2wUItI5VjIhs2AROdk67Qtph/4332fAkm2sEQXog0AhkBYSqlHeweneTBt37h0MhZ HREKSaqkv93NeYTydRk4RF+eRqHR4QezsLQArP1lOWC0Fn8ZshKxdPV9uqZGYcY/Y3i8nLhk+aoXB1Ek11uuGJodXhjG2mmXtlP9Ycy8jEksuiCDJZdCuyBr S4VIiGknk2DT4wZGRc6b0ySdt0dDDKjXREn+DXjjZPY=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/HVZ-H4WnOUBsmHeIRJ-4qZPW4Zc>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Encoding Arbitrary Time Ratios
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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, 05 Apr 2021 23:37:33 -0000


> On Apr 5, 2021, at 3:28 PM, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@intel.com> wrote:
> 
>> How about just a new tag for a date expressed as the number of days since
>> the epoch? 
> 
> Semantically indicating a date without time would be far more valuable, 
> regardless of how it gets encoded. Simply expressing a time point that happens 
> to be midnight UTC on a particular date is not that. So I support this idea.

It’s been done.:-)  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8943

LL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email