Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
> -Original Message- > From: Carsten Bormann > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 9:41 AM > To: Felipe Gasper > Cc: Benjamin Kaduk ; Roman Danyliw ; > Daniel Migault ; erdt...@spotify.com; > i...@augustcellars.com; ace@ietf.org; m...@microsoft.com; > e...@wahlstromstekniska.se; hannes.tschofe...@arm.com > Subject: Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710) > > On Apr 29, 2019, at 18:15, Felipe Gasper wrote: > > > > In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of key: > > a UTF-8 string. In CBOR, any valid CBOR item can be a map key. > > CWT uses signed and unsigned integers, in addition to UTF-8 strings, > > as map keys. > > s/CBOR item/CBOR data item/ (this is the term we use in 7049) > > Also, I think > s/UTF-8 string/text string/g > The fact that this is encoded in UTF-8 is somewhat on a different level of > detail. +1 on this. There is not really a restriction that UTF-8 strings be the key in JSON. If you encoded the JSON as UTF-16 then it would be a UTF-16 string. Jim > > Finally, s/signed/negative/ if you want to follow the CBOR terminology here. > (Otherwise, all unsigned integers are also signed integers :-) > > Grüße, Carsten ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 09:53:01AM -0700, Jim Schaad wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Carsten Bormann > > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 9:41 AM > > To: Felipe Gasper > > Cc: Benjamin Kaduk ; Roman Danyliw ; > > Daniel Migault ; erdt...@spotify.com; > > i...@augustcellars.com; ace@ietf.org; m...@microsoft.com; > > e...@wahlstromstekniska.se; hannes.tschofe...@arm.com > > Subject: Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710) > > > > On Apr 29, 2019, at 18:15, Felipe Gasper wrote: > > > > > > In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of key: > > > a UTF-8 string. In CBOR, any valid CBOR item can be a map key. > > > CWT uses signed and unsigned integers, in addition to UTF-8 strings, > > > as map keys. > > > > s/CBOR item/CBOR data item/ (this is the term we use in 7049) > > > > Also, I think > > s/UTF-8 string/text string/g > > The fact that this is encoded in UTF-8 is somewhat on a different level of > > detail. > > +1 on this. There is not really a restriction that UTF-8 strings be the key > in JSON. If you encoded the JSON as UTF-16 then it would be a UTF-16 string. I think I'm also +1 on that, but do recall that RFC 8529 mandates UTF-8 for exchange among a non-closed ecosystem (i.e., all internet usage). -Ben ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
> On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:40 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > On Apr 29, 2019, at 18:15, Felipe Gasper wrote: >> >> In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of key: >> a UTF-8 string. In CBOR, any valid CBOR item can be a map key. >> CWT uses signed and unsigned integers, in addition to UTF-8 strings, >> as map keys. > > s/CBOR item/CBOR data item/ (this is the term we use in 7049) > > Also, I think > s/UTF-8 string/text string/g > The fact that this is encoded in UTF-8 is somewhat on a different level of > detail. > > Finally, s/signed/negative/ if you want to follow the CBOR terminology here. > (Otherwise, all unsigned integers are also signed integers :-) Iteration #3: - In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of key: a text string. CBOR allows any data item to be a map key. CWT thus uses integers, in addition to text strings, as map keys. - -FG ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
> -Original Message- > From: Felipe Gasper > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 9:04 AM > To: Benjamin Kaduk > Cc: ace@ietf.org; m...@microsoft.com; e...@wahlstromstekniska.se; > erdt...@spotify.com; hannes.tschofe...@arm.com; r...@cert.org; > daniel.miga...@ericsson.com; i...@augustcellars.com > Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710) > > > > On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:00 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > > > 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 > >> > >> 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. > > Ah, agreed. Is there a way I can update my proposed phrase? The editor only > seems to allow submission of a new erratum. > > It may be worth disambiguating between binary and UTF-8 strings, too; JSON > only allows UTF-8 strings, while CBOR also allows binary. I would agree that it would make sense to say that. However CBOR uses the term "byte string" not "binary string" so use the right term. Jim > > -F ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
> On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:05 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:03:57PM -0400, Felipe Gasper wrote: >> >>> On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:00 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: >>> >>> 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 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. >> >> Ah, agreed. Is there a way I can update my proposed phrase? The editor only >> seems to allow submission of a new erratum. > > I can edit the "corrected text" field during the verification process... > >> It may be worth disambiguating between binary and UTF-8 strings, too; JSON >> only allows UTF-8 strings, while CBOR also allows binary. > > ...so we can figure out the right phrasing here on the list, and then I'll > fix things up in the system. So maybe something like: - In JSON, maps are called objects and only have one kind of key: a UTF-8 string. In CBOR, any valid CBOR item can be a map key. CWT uses signed and unsigned integers, in addition to UTF-8 strings, as map keys. - -F ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:03:57PM -0400, Felipe Gasper wrote: > > > On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:00 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > > > 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 > >> > >> 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. > > Ah, agreed. Is there a way I can update my proposed phrase? The editor only > seems to allow submission of a new erratum. I can edit the "corrected text" field during the verification process... > It may be worth disambiguating between binary and UTF-8 strings, too; JSON > only allows UTF-8 strings, while CBOR also allows binary. so we can figure out the right phrasing here on the list, and then I'll fix things up in the system. -Ben ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
> On Apr 29, 2019, at 12:00 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > 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 >> >> 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. Ah, agreed. Is there a way I can update my proposed phrase? The editor only seems to allow submission of a new erratum. It may be worth disambiguating between binary and UTF-8 strings, too; JSON only allows UTF-8 strings, while CBOR also allows binary. -F ___ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Re: [Ace] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8392 (5710)
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 > > 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 Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
