On 2023-05-27, at 17:25, Ilari Liusvaara <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> - "For better readability, the example is first presented in JSON (with
>  the long line broken for display purposes only)." ... That does not
>  look like JSON, it looks like CBOR diagnostic format.

Section 8 of RFC 8949 calls it CBOR diagnostic notation (the examples are using 
extensions from Appendix G of RFC 8610 as well, specifically Appendix G.6).

> […]
> 
> - Is the required order wrong way around? AFAICT, it is 1, -1, -2, -3,
>  like in the diagnostic format.

There is no point in specifying a required order in this spec; CBOR 
deterministic encoding takes care of this.  So I didn’t look at the order in 
the English language list.
The diagnostic notation is showing the right order of the map keys:

1 ➔ 0x01
-1 ➔ 0x20
-2 ➔ 0x21
-3 ➔ 0x22

https://cbor.me/?diag=1,%20-1,%20-2,%20-3

Grüße, Carsten

_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

Reply via email to