[Cbor] Re: I-D Action: draft-mcnally-deterministic-cbor-10.html

[Anders Rundgren <[e-mail]>]

On 2024-07-30 23:58, Wolf McNally wrote:

<snip>

> It is on you to argue why deterministic encoding of identical semantics for such a common data type as “number” should be a secondary consideration, and you have so far failed to do this.

Wolf,

First off, nobody claims that numeric reduction doesn't work.  A variant of numeric reduction is even a part of RFC8949: 4.2.2 rule 1.

However, the CBOR WG presumably believe that separating integer and floating point values represents the preferred way to achieve determinism for numbers, otherwise they wouldn't have adopted the CDE draft as a WG item.

Since you have already decided to use numeric reduction no matter what, there is little room for a more nuanced discussion, including identifying where your applications would run into difficulties if this particular feature was dropped.  The latter should (IMO...) be possible to illustrate with a simple example.

Anders
> 
> ~ Wolf