Re: [Cbor] I-D Action: draft-ietf-cbor-edn-literals-02.txt

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 23 July 2023 09:46 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 C03DDC151522 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Jul 2023 02:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.886
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s5Sf0FzfNZPq for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Jul 2023 02:46:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E6A8C151095 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Jul 2023 02:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.124] (p548dc15c.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.193.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4R7z2T6ybkzDCd4; Sun, 23 Jul 2023 11:46:25 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <169010547552.64092.3977882938713731144@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2023 11:46:25 +0200
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 711798385.578156-11439ddd6f4b43e874cd9ba16e217dd5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7BD1BF40-9F5D-4BA2-ACCB-BF37A216D570@tzi.org>
References: <169010547552.64092.3977882938713731144@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/N-uX5XiT0U___NFSXFur2HOxukQ>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] I-D Action: draft-ietf-cbor-edn-literals-02.txt
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sun, 23 Jul 2023 09:46:31 -0000

This fixes a typo and merges PR #3 (EDN vs. CDDL -> Appendix B).

Apart from the usual comments, I would be interested to hear about topics you have encountered when working with EDN (diagnostic notation) or explaining EDN to others; maybe we can address them similar to the way the short Appendix B discusses EDN vs. CDDL.

I will be yawning a lot during Monday's 24:30Z to 25:30Z (Tuesday's 00:30Z to 01:30Z) CBOR meeting, but we do have a short slot in the agenda for this.

Grüße, Carsten



> On 2023-07-23, at 11:44, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Concise Binary Object
> Representation Maintenance and Extensions (CBOR) WG of the IETF.
> 
>   Title           : Application-Oriented Literals in CBOR Extended Diagnostic Notation
>   Author          : Carsten Bormann
>   Filename        : draft-ietf-cbor-edn-literals-02.txt
>   Pages           : 17
>   Date            : 2023-07-23
> 
> Abstract:
>   The Concise Binary Object Representation, CBOR (RFC 8949), defines a
>   "diagnostic notation" in order to be able to converse about CBOR data
>   items without having to resort to binary data.
> 
>   This document specifies how to add application-oriented extensions to
>   the diagnostic notation.  It then defines two such extensions for
>   text representations of epoch-based date/times and of Constrained
>   Resource Identifiers (draft-ietf-core-href).
> 
>   To facilitate tool interoperation, this document also specifies a
>   formal ABNF definition for extended diagnostic notation (EDN) that
>   accommodates application-oriented literals.
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cbor-edn-literals/
> 
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-cbor-edn-literals-02.html
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-cbor-edn-literals-02