Re: [Cbor] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9277 (7144)

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 2022-10-04, at 16:57, Barry Leiba <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Indeed, this looks almost right, but I think the correction is meant
> to be "[RFC 8742]".  Carsten, Michael?

No, really, the reference was to Section 2.3 (“2.3.  Enveloping Method: Labeled CBOR Sequence”, which certainly uses RFC 8742, but describes a specific way to use it):

OLD:
   As with the Labeled CBOR Sequence {#sequences}, this choice of the
   tag content places the ASCII characters "CBOR" prominently into the
   header.

NEW:
   As with the Labeled CBOR Sequence (Section 2.3), this choice of the
   tag content places the ASCII characters "CBOR" prominently into the
   header.

(In kramdown-rfc, in some places {#sequences} is an anchor, and {{sequences}} would have been the reference to that…  Ouch.  Yours truly introduced this bug on 2022-04-20, which BTW is a calendar date that fills Germans with horror…)

Grüße, Carsten


> Barry
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 10:49 AM RFC Errata System
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9277,
>> "On Stable Storage for Items in Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)".
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7144
>> 
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Editorial
>> Reported by: Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>
>> 
>> Section: Appendix D
>> 
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>> {#sequences}
>> 
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> (Section 2.3)
>>