Re: [Cbor] Implementing float->int numeric reduction

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 16. Aug 2023, at 14:48, Anders Rundgren <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On 2023-08-16 12:50, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> On 2023-08-16, at 12:21, Anders Rundgren <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> You could for example put 4.0 in the left window of https://cbor.me, check the deterministic box, and hit go.
>>> This will return f94400 which bombs in a proper dCBOR implementation including in mine:
>>> https://cyberphone.github.io/dCBOR-demo/doc/playground.html
>> Yes.  cbor.me currently only offers what I hope will be the Common CBOR Deterministic Encoding Profile.
> 
> Does this mean that the Common CBOR Deterministic Encoding Profile isn't a YAF (Yet Another Framework)?

I can’t derive semantics from this question.  Please elaborate.

>> It does not implement the dCBOR application profile,
> 
> How to explain the value and difference between a dCBOR *Application Profile* and a Common CBOR Deterministic *Encoding Profile* to a rather uninformed market?

I wasn’t sure we are already at the stage where we name things, hence my carrying around of unwieldy names such as Common CBOR Deterministic Encoding Profile.  
I think that “Gordian dCBOR” already is a fine name, but if you want to define an application profile that is different from "just use Common CBOR Deterministic Encoding Profile" (I can’t find out from your document, so you’ll need to tell us), we need a name for that as well, and the “D-CBOR” you use right now could be confusing if “dCBOR” (with qualifiers added) is something else.

Grüße, Carsten