IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] CBOR tag for RFC 3339 full-date values

Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com> Thu, 12 March 2020 02:03 UTC

Return-Path: <lgl@island-resort.com>
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 038B33A112F for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.359
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.359 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.463, 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 BbYEx6cAxA7S for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa06-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa06-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.103]) (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 F1B4B3A112D for <cbor@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.78] ([76.167.193.86]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA id CDC4jC1LAJHZdCDC5j8tGK; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:29 -0700
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=KYasTjQD c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=t2DvPg6iSvRzsOFYbaV4uQ==:117 a=t2DvPg6iSvRzsOFYbaV4uQ==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=gKmFwSsBAAAA:8 a=fG3tKtGKH3ytwyPhRw4A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=YDy5t6Yr9p8wp1XV9_4A:9 a=I38kX-qWtSvyL0C0:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=nnPW6aIcBuj1ljLj_o6Q:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: lgl@island-resort.com
From: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
Message-Id: <0CC4FB79-5655-4983-AD89-42DEFADD1D92@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F611B07D-2108-4FDE-8010-2E2356047729"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:03:28 -0700
In-Reply-To: <79EDF742-2E54-4829-93F2-BE5A009734E2@tzi.org>
Cc: "\"Richter, Jörg\"" <Joerg.Richter@pdv-FS.de>, "cbor@ietf.org" <cbor@ietf.org>, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Anthony Nadalin <tonynad@microsoft.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
References: <CH2PR00MB0679818FABC93C37FF88A404F5E40@CH2PR00MB0679.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <AB18584F-BA25-464E-8DEC-217067D7643E@tzi.org> <282209381d8b4a8b8e77515142266df2@pdv-FS.de> <DD66072D-5319-49D7-85A0-F6F2D354A52D@tzi.org> <5D27981B-81C8-43C0-A229-66343D9D67B4@tzi.org> <ca2d18b543ce4e60acadad861b8d17da@pdv-FS.de> <79EDF742-2E54-4829-93F2-BE5A009734E2@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfE7p0qRqrFd0tOUSPLYmBNiK1lihfcuhzhFxdgBJlbl1vePADtPY4NJp+OKOS5G1npGXmI8eXuqCsxezB5OWG2F5DTvtDC0PbCzmkCCiSwx0pPdmsdEL kfTC82LKvAWjGyZJJ59kdAXYfUqmt5CmG8HxGREYYA5pKoXH9Ua0gA4Ke8y9cmzi8SGDcsH72VHOTdaLnfmUCjPhRGC/VoBkC7vNrKgEEs+azN5XfUJscRP6 WlV85Jsa6vbZ/ova+hoShBurN7OK5rFKsA5yD/VxOh4wZjE4kMITC5jDIu3uklbxAcJkojxpr6Si5KmBkRYCeg==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/ghJva2MtHnNglrdpAouiIIZTdFI>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] CBOR tag for RFC 3339 full-date values
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: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 02:03:31 -0000

> On Mar 11, 2020, at 2:09 PM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
>>> Fractions of days can be represented by tag 0 or tag 1 using
>>> hours, minutes, seconds. 64-bit integer counts of days are large enough.
>> 
>> This I don't understand. The proposal only handles whole days as one number.
> 
> Right.  Only full days.  (The related observation is that these are always in the local time of some context that is not expressed, which is rather different from our time tags.)

Right. If you wish to represent a fraction of a day (which is a time), don’t use this tag. Use tag 0 or tag 1 that already exists to represent a time. This tag doesn’t need to handle it. Same with distant future or past.

LL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email