IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] Request for IANA registry addition for cbor tag

Kio Smallwood <kio@mothers-arms.co.uk> Tue, 21 January 2020 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <kio@mothers-arms.co.uk>
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 936751200F5 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:59:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 tnGfb0gbRsTT for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:59:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from b-painless.mh.aa.net.uk (b-painless.mh.aa.net.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:0:30::52]) (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 EC51A1200F4 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:59:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a-webmail.mh.aa.net.uk ([2001:8b0:0:30::75] helo=webmail.aa.net.uk) by b-painless.mh.aa.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <kio@mothers-arms.co.uk>) id 1itsBp-00060c-E7; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:59:25 +0000
Received: from 130.14-255-62.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk ([62.255.14.130]) by webmail.aa.net.uk with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:59:19 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:59:19 +0000
From: Kio Smallwood <kio@mothers-arms.co.uk>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: cbor@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <75E3B32F-CEF8-4338-917D-2264006287FF@tzi.org>
References: <8eefb11ba6e49f7f19fd645d11d47a7f@mothers-arms.co.uk> <75E3B32F-CEF8-4338-917D-2264006287FF@tzi.org>
Message-ID: <d1b7efc62bd23817382b86674359ae98@mothers-arms.co.uk>
X-Sender: kio@mothers-arms.co.uk
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/R2F25xfGPsM4LJgpNA73oTfb6Yc>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] Request for IANA registry addition for cbor tag
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: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:59:32 -0000

Hi Carsten,

Thanks I've update the diagnostic notation.

I've never looked at multimaps (Python replaces values with duplicate 
keys in it's native dict so it's never come up for us)

Cheers,
Kio


On 2020-01-21 11:26, Carsten Bormann wrote:

> Hi Kio,
> 
> overall, your registration request looks good to me.
> (Nit: The way you are using single quotes in your diagnostic notation 
> triggers appendix G.2 of RFC 8610 [0], which apparently is not what you 
> want.)
> In the editorial revision of RFC 7049 that we are creating right now 
> [1], we are moving away from the concept of a strict decoder; instead 
> we are identifying the specific checking tasks in more detail (here: 
> map validity [2]).
> 
> Thank you for also bringing this to the WG.
> A lot of people have been suggesting one or another form of ordered map 
> (including ordered multimaps, which would remove the need for avoiding 
> duplicate keys).  Maybe we can have a short discussion if the 
> registration of this kind of ordered maps is a good reason to complete 
> registration of related kinds.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> [0]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8610#appendix-G.2
> [1]: https://github.com/cbor-wg/CBORbis
> [2]: 
> https://cbor-wg.github.io/CBORbis/draft-ietf-cbor-7049bis.html#rfc.section.5.3.1
> 
>> On 2020-01-21, at 12:14, Kio Smallwood <kio@mothers-arms.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi CBOR list,
>> 
>> I'd like to register the following tag for representing key-value maps 
>> where the order of keys is significant and must be passed through 
>> encode/decode steps without re-ordering:
>> 
>> Requesting tag #272
>> Data item: array
>> Semantics: Ordered Map
>> Point of contact: kio.smallwood@flexitricity.com
>> Description of semantics (URL): 
>> https://github.com/Sekenre/cbor-ordered-map-spec/blob/master/CBOR_Ordered_Map.md
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> CBOR mailing list
>> CBOR@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CBOR mailing list
> CBOR@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email