IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cbor] [httpapi] [core] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-core-problem-details

Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com> Sat, 14 May 2022 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <robipolli@gmail.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 B662CC1595E6; Sat, 14 May 2022 06:51:31 -0700 (PDT)
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8eHpeaVY4H4W; Sat, 14 May 2022 06:51:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x12c.google.com (mail-il1-x12c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 561A2C159522; Sat, 14 May 2022 06:51:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x12c.google.com with SMTP id l15so7587911ilh.3; Sat, 14 May 2022 06:51:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hqniQOPh1FQcl2yT2gDFGmUI4XYkqrnksFzsuHoSybo=; b=hdoTuL/GnHPCQ5GqcUg+IadLdb44Ex9JlUKGnkx8PclwB0zVtiMjvSXSe8vo7rnauS PdjqeQ5e2ARG0I+oNhULG+k/S4ke+A8N1mVjY9xtJTEMb5/qLxRqHrfwMSlrgwWUikj1 vdiT+lPEvrOel8kveIEcm1entVrdrNAVy4GYSmxzXBDa+g+saSOpOnNhTwp4y2V/eV5A 7F1MzKgmLiEoJe4WDUJ6ib5QTEiurjkZIXW1gnvOj2gvZnoJLfLzTb8Ax3sW4qZ1HCrI 1fQJWC5/nQYedDsN3O5Oig+WGmE0sVuHOD7wUDWYpy1ZOa2CGjrpVpcGJoUfuE98q5j+ zvWw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hqniQOPh1FQcl2yT2gDFGmUI4XYkqrnksFzsuHoSybo=; b=OuFY6v1rQpoA5cjDOO8uR9GAq+7XBevC26YPjE7j5B1khcKL32VA/8pGU59+9LqOWl Ob8O+w2WANd3U/P34JRPeDdyNHvkvEqxjS79RhRpn5olCabHcMTnaiipytObg0HP5TcS fWVURd2z26X66j41aToR2v9v6gLdtpF0e6ZJSsCQuk2qODJdVx0OgezZ1VIMmMCy0mdz m6gA2q8V+D2hwR3+TLt0Ch2Gnya+IIHd+iUJ7Qbc+G+CF/RzRq7JYkYX6RtuG/H55M1v WMJE6Oi78HQ5FHkl1lFnL1Sp+/rQxsbavGFGAyObsRLiLiUHWrZZgsxidOpbz9MooAgy hsjA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5300cUgr3adf44NMiqdOP36wRu/V/DC/yI+r92GA8sa1vgnAg6/g eXA+7i0G5xvDVIvJ4zGd8r+6JHBawYXmFBM7iNXYnqoB2Ao=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxxrBhC3pxzTp71djSkIatVYQoYYMx+VkEvteJuoypnnxjW6X+amx+D9O7yOIfb8fYSYRfklGNIf3laBfOcaJg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1ba1:b0:2cf:232b:aa85 with SMTP id n1-20020a056e021ba100b002cf232baa85mr4730735ili.2.1652536290327; Sat, 14 May 2022 06:51:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3a2fb1c8-5c50-fa7a-0672-a73c3b6f1a5f@ri.se> <CAP9qbHV8dEsNvkCd8=Gvn+htDnxqD4kAfO5TONx36S0t8tjK-g@mail.gmail.com> <4380231C-D5A7-4431-8E2A-65AE532D549F@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <4380231C-D5A7-4431-8E2A-65AE532D549F@tzi.org>
From: Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 15:51:19 +0200
Message-ID: <CAP9qbHU5HPUwym5zFnS+Ak4RJRcZmuzG8e+vHV60joC=Sx=Rsw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca=40ri.se@dmarc.ietf.org>, "core@ietf.org WG (core@ietf.org)" <core@ietf.org>, cbor@ietf.org, "httpapi@ietf.org" <httpapi@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/xrC08BTyZX4PrLwPn7imViYOfyc>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] [httpapi] [core] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-core-problem-details
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Sat, 14 May 2022 13:51:31 -0000

Hi Carsten,

thanks for your email!

Il giorno sab 14 mag 2022 alle ore 01:21 Carsten Bormann
<cabo@tzi.org> ha scritto:
> > For example: should a future fragment identifier spec for application/cbor be
> > compatible with all subtypes delegating it to the application/cbor?
>
> I believe it should.
> But then, we haven’t identified a common CBOR fragment identifier syntax yet.
> [..] something like a CBOR-oriented version of JSONPath [...]

Clear. This requires a governance of the +cbor media type ecosystem that
we currently do not have on +yaml. For example, openapi+yaml will
use JSON Pointers.

> [..] there should be something in application/cbor’s fragment syntax
> that branches out to application specific fragment identifier syntaxes.

Ok.

> Re your draft: [..]
I'll reply in a separate email / thread.

Thx++,
R.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email