Re: [Cbor] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8610 (6527)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 14 April 2021 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 314C33A15D1 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:18:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.918
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 wN4YfTt-_CxG for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:18:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D455E3A15EE for <cbor@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dc178.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.193.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FL71m2y65zybX; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:18:20 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <000101d7313a$937e2160$ba7a6420$@ewellic.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:18:19 +0200
Cc: Sean Bartell <smbarte2@illinois.edu>, christoph.vigano@uni-bremen.de, Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, cbor@ietf.org, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, =?utf-8?Q?Christian_Ams=C3=BCss?= <christian@amsuess.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 640109898.906027-501053973f087a1dfd93cd6ec236b745
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C81B921B-00A4-4DAB-95ED-4254DACB9366@tzi.org>
References: <20210411161045.9648FF40799@rfc-editor.org> <4986660B-EDCC-4D07-A74E-BBEBE698721D@tzi.org> <2E410DD1-D0E2-4137-B7E7-7FB18CF71971@tzi.org> <CALaySJJAzJgtQY9wuF1dgCQRfTSAz3Ofva-N-EwqcFGo_d6XEw@mail.gmail.com> <513F7F4F-E791-4B96-AF3E-42A7B1447EF7@ericsson.com> <73c7a676bea744e48390f9fdb2639843@DM6PR11MB3834.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <5a2abb26-2a17-4b1b-b491-7bac8485e69a@www.fastmail.com> <DF1E72C2-D300-4561-A991-60D48F6EC027@tzi.org> <000101d7313a$937e2160$ba7a6420$@ewellic.org>
To: Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/ljHAiw-WhNqoIKAzkjZa4WIf56Q>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8610 (6527)
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: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:18:34 -0000

Nice!

hexchar = non-surrogate / (high-surrogate "\" %x75 low-surrogate)
non-surrogate = ((DIGIT / "A"/"B"/"C" / "E"/"F") 3HEXDIG) /
                ("D" %x30-37 2HEXDIG )
high-surrogate = "D" ("8"/"9"/"A"/"B") 2HEXDIG
low-surrogate = "D" ("C"/"D"/"E"/"F") 2HEXDIG

Now in use in
https://github.com/cabo/cddlc/blob/master/lib/parser/cddl.abnf.orig

Grüße, Carsten



> On 2021-04-14, at 16:29, Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org> wrote:
> 
> I just wrote:
> 
>> I'd like to see separate ABNF definitions for UNICODE_SCALAR_VALUE,
>> HIGH_SURROGATE, and LOW_SURROGATE, and then see 'hexchar' defined in
>> terms of those. I think that would make it clearer what is going on.
> 
> Of course it can't be UNICODE_SCALAR_VALUE, but something like NONSURROGATE that conveys the meaning "any 4-digit hex value excluding surrogates."
> 
> --
> Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org
> 
> 
>