On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 08:55:53AM -0700, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8392, > "CBOR Web Token (CWT)". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5710 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Felipe Gasper <[email protected]> > > Section: 1.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of map key: a > string. CBOR uses strings, negative integers, and unsigned integers > as map keys. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of map key: > a string. CBOR allows other data types, such as strings, negative > integers, and unsigned integers, as map keys. > > Notes > ----- > The text as it stands risks an interpretation that CBOR limits map keys to > integers and strings; per discussion on the CBOR mailing list, this is not > the case.
I see the CBOR list traffic in the archive (e.g., https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/LyndIfQipxUfx0cu6nlOwi6ceOY) and agree with the sentiment that the CWT spec should not inadvertently over-specify the behavior of CBOR The proposed new text is itself flawed, though, as it claims that strings are an "other data type" with respect to strings. -Ben _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
