Re: [Cbor] Consolidated set of tags for map-like entities

"Unique Keys: no" as zero bit was chosen so that the first tag in the set
is equivalent to no tag at all. Your point about understandability is well
taken and I will change the column heading as you suggested.

I'll expand it to 4 bits in the "Key/Value Type" section as you suggested.
Thanks!

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 3:50 PM Joe Hildebrand <hildjj@cursive.net> wrote:

> Suggestion: make "Unique Keys: no" be a zero bit in the LSB, not 1, for
> ease of understanding the table.  Alternately, rename to "Allow duplicate
> keys".
>
> In the "Key/Value Type" section, perhaps use 4 bits, so it's more clear
> which bits you're talking about?
>
> Data Item being major type 5 should really only be used if the keys are
> homogeneously strings, in my opinion.
>
> Overall, this feels like somewhat overkill, but solves the problem and I'd
> be fine with it if it allowed us to move on.
>
> —
> Joe Hildebrand
>
> > On Mar 12, 2021, at 4:50 PM, Emile Cormier <emile.cormier.jr@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I've been corresponding privately with Prof. Bormann about a new tag I
> proposed for encoding multimaps as arrays or pairs. He's made me aware of
> your recent discussion about another proposed tag for encoding "ordered"
> maps, where the insertion order must be preserved. Carsten has indicated to
> me his desire to consolidate all of these map-related tags together.
> >
> > I would like to contribute to this endeavor of consolidating map-related
> tags. To get the discussion started, I would like to share with you a draft
> proposal I've written to serve as a starting point:
> https://github.com/ecorm/cbor-map-like
> >
> > Here's a brief summary:
> >
> > This document proposes a consolidated set of CBOR tags for map-like
> entities involving key-value pairs. These tags encode the following
> meta-data concerning map-like entities:
> >       • the homogeneity of the key and value types,
> >       • the preservation of the insertion order of the key-value pairs,
> >       • the uniqueness of the keys, and,
> >       • the major type used to encode the key-value pairs.
> > My interest in CBOR stems from my work on a new C++ serialization
> library that can support any JSON-like encoding. This library is closed
> source for now, but I may be able to convince my employer to make it open
> source in the future.
> >
> > I'm also involved with the WAMP protocol, which allows CBOR as one of
> its encodings.
> >
> > I'm looking forward to collaborating with you and I hope that we can
> come to a solution that satisfies everyone's needs.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Emile Cormier
> > _______________________________________________
> > CBOR mailing list
> > CBOR@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor
>
>