Re: [Cbor] AD review of draft-ietf-cbor-file-magic-10

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 2022-04-03, at 21:41, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> I have created a pull request with changes for the items that I think we could resolve:
>> https://github.com/cbor-wg/cbor-magic-number/pull/20
>> A few responses below, with a few questions embedded.
>> I haven’t done 14 to 19 yet.
> 
> I perhaps finished all the points on top of Carsten's branch.

Thank you!

I see two comments from Francesca we haven’t replied to and two more we haven’t addressed yet:

> 16. -----
> 
> Section 5.1 and 5.2
> 
> […]
> 
> Additional comment: I think it is better to described the Data Item as "byte string" as for the current registration, rather than update to "tagged byte string" - that is not a CBOR Data Item per se.

Well, 55800 and 55801 are meant to have a tagged byte string as their content:
The tag is the 32-bit tag that actually defines the format.

So it’s 55800(1330664270(h'424F52’)) (diagnostic notation in Appendix B) or
#6.55801(#6.1668546992('BOR’)) (Appendix C.1, this time in CDDL form).


> 
> 17. -----
> 
> […]
> 
> Also it is a bit confusing to use "NNNNNNNN" and not just "N" (as I read it as a decimal, and 8xN doesn't really give me any more information about the number).

I think NNNNNNNN is a reasonable representation of a larger number, but I’m also not opposed to changing this to N (twice).


Also, we might want to work a bit on:

> 18. -----
> 
> Appendix A
> 
> FP: I have some vague memory of this being discussed during interims - so please remind me if I have forgotten, but why is this an appendix rather than in the document itself?

We might provide a little more text about moving this into an appendix.

> 19. -----
> 
> Appendix C
> 
> FP: I think a bit more text around the motivation and need for such a tag would be useful.

Yes, that also could use a bit more work.

Despite 18 and 19 not yet being addressed, I would prefer to submit a -11 with what we have now so people actually review that and not -10.

Grüße, Carsten