Hi Antoine, Thank you for the clarification -- we'll leave as-is!
Sincerely, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Sep 23, 2025, at 12:00 PM, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > Unless you can tell us of a more appropriate type for CBOR EDN, we believe > cbor-diag is correct for these figures. > > Best, > AntoineFrom: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 17:38 > To: Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]>; Cedric Fournet <[email protected]>; > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Document intake questions about > <draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs-17> > [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why > this is important athttps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > Hi Antoine, > > Thank you for your reply. > > Regarding: > >> 6) This document contains sourcecode: > >> > >> * Does the sourcecode validate? > > > > Yes, the source code is either EDN (automatically generated) or CDDL > > (validates). > > > The following figures are currently set to type "cbor-diag": > > Figure 2: An example COSE Signature with multiple receipts > Figure 6: Receipt of Inclusion > igure 9: Example consistency receipt > > Is this still correct? > > Thank you, > Sarah Tarrant > RFC Production Center > > > > On Sep 23, 2025, at 10:32 AM, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > 6) This document contains sourcecode: > > > > * Does the sourcecode validate? > > > > Yes, the source code is either EDN (automatically generated) or CDDL > > (validates). -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
