Bespoke packet diagram format: a critique

[Dmitri Tikhonov <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

The new packet diagram format (1) introduced in Transport I-D 28
is not precise enough:

I.  High vs low bits

    From which side are we filling bytes?  Take, for example, the
    Example Structure from Section 1.3 (1): is One-bit Field 0x80
    or 0x01?

II. Multiple of eight/byte-spanning fields

    Fields that span bytes are never *not* multiples of eight.
    This should be stated explicitly.

On a stylistic note, I recommend using the word "custom" instead
of "bespoke."  The former is much more likely to be understood by
a wide audience of readers without making it reach for a dictionary.
Some anecdatal evidence:  In my 25-plus years of using English (not
my native tongue) as a primary means of communication, I had only
looked up what "bespoke" meant a few years ago.

  - Dmitri.

1. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-quic-transport-28#section-1.3