Re: [Cbor] eliding CBOR diagnostic notation binary contents

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 04 February 2022 20:30 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 144A63A223B for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 12:30:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
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 jHAFbrO9rfvz for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 12:30:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B46DC3A2237 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 12:30:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856B438B80; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 15:37:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id VGCjoj_fvMQF; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 15:37:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B2E838B7F; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 15:37:20 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1644007040; bh=U/CGeS5OIAhE9XVmaXeEmSBqO9tBljfs3PfL/MO2/AE=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=WNF9+6I1B7ibB4WXl3cZJsjXtAV8sSfSA1j5E8IxAxoNULAEq3/ObC6weXVSRmxaa 68ZbKGe54S4BmPwXxDZvqx8TCnnHZBTghrR1AcIepM8sdFWqDX1wRYnitgeYVXotkM 5+hyrOqLPAJqAb2PTxhzgKfPmf2MZ/tdPm/QMvGJ3nGbFcRW/H3J9riQyzH+hjp/FG Nnj68dTpCU36N76OO8HHG2dH4khPuhQzHWkeRJRhuccs1RWTQZO54HP1wD42hzbiw0 Jp10GQtsimXwJh9VVD8BALSR4ZbAU9WVr6b1aHpANDYLn4UVrV+VZQRhaI5Ee5qJi/ I+6azze9PHqdg==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328206CE; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 15:29:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, cbor@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <982B35D9-8541-4AB6-88DE-55018DB5BB6B@tzi.org>
References: <289545.1643998363@dooku> <982B35D9-8541-4AB6-88DE-55018DB5BB6B@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 15:29:57 -0500
Message-ID: <27168.1644006597@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/bsBotu7i3AyFxm4z0y6oQijJvFk>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] eliding CBOR diagnostic notation binary contents
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: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 20:30:12 -0000

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
    > Additional syntax for elisions makes a lot of sense to me.
    > Not sure there needs to be a h’…’ around that (why not b64’…’, by the
    > way?).

b64() would disingenious, I think.
As for why h'...',  I might want to do h'30...AB' providing just a tiny bit of context.

I agree that going beyond that is verging on CDDL.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide