Minutes interim-2018-cbor-06: Wed 15:00
minutes-interim-2018-cbor-06-201810171500-01

CBOR WG Conference Call
Wednesday, Oct 17 2018, 15:00 - 16:00 UTC
Chairs: Barry Leiba, Francesca Palombini

Minute takers: Francesca

Participants:
* Barry
* Carsten Bormann
* Michael Richardson
* Paul Hoffman
* Francesca
* Laurence Lundblade

Hackathon 103:
    Barry: are we going to have an interop?
    Carsten: if we have issues where an interop would help
    Barry: Not necessarily, but rather for visibility
    AP Barry: presence at the Hackathon, at the wishi table, come and join us

CDDL status:
    Carsten: IANA questions
                * CDDL control operators are new registry
                * should the entries be alphebatized
        Barry: why not, but it does not really matter
        Carsten: if it makes more logic sense, having them in another order
        2 reviews to fix before IETF103
        Waiting for writeup from Alexey
        AP Barry: ping Alexey
        Telechat in december hopefully
        For Bangkok we can summarize the changes from reviews

CBOR Bis
        Carsten: any substential feedback from Jeffrey we need to discuss in
        Bangkok Paul: one major issue is key equivalence, a number of minor
        issues. Pull requests waiting to be fixed to be mergeable. Carsten:
        first commit on the issue from Laurence 6 days ago. Most of the work is
        done but we have to agree that we agree.

        map key equivalence commit
        Carsten going through
        https://github.com/cbor-wg/CBORbis/commit/d2ba777d54faa649c8e6b30c09e19ac898426be8
                - generic definition
                - preferred encoding for floating point values (all the time
                not just for when they are keys) - data model use in
                equivalence of keys section - new text about preferred
                serialization: started from Laurence text but editorially
                different
        Michael: doesn't like this non-binary interoperability.
        Laurence: looking for clear rule that if you follow you always are
        going to be interoperable Carsten: maybe can be rephrased in "some
        protocol create the opportunity to have that" Michael: this is not
        under implementation section. "protocol designers may want to use
        constrained decoders, they need to call that out, whenever they make
        use of shortcut that does not make use of preferred serialization"
        Laurence: most interested in indefinite length. Carsten: make the role
        of the protocol more clear. Laurence, Michael: yes Michael: if we
        don't, people will make bad assumptions Carsten: Ok, thanks

        Laurence: PR for dates and for shortest floating point
        Carsten: floating point is the commit above, the other still on the
        todo list Laurence: reference IEEE754 Carsten: yes we should

        Laurence: precision for floating point
        Carsten points to l. 1270-1278 in commit above
        Carsten: I think putting information in here would be wrong. Important
        part is that if you choose an encoding that loses precision, that
        should be something that is explicit, desired buy the application, but
        the other direction is not very useful Laurence: how do you decide if
        something can make been shorter or not? Carsten: line 1271 Laurence: we
        should interop test Carsten: Hackathon 103

        Michael: suggestion: we should have some text about "cbor based
        protocol is supposed/expected to use all preferred serialization"
        Carsten: yes we can add that

        Carsten: next steps: wait on Jeffrey's feedback before including his
        requests. Try to get Laurence's in before drafts cutoff.

        AP chairs: Agenda for Bangkok meeting to be requested in the mailing
        list

        Array tag: Carsten to check that the draft was updated and then adopt

        Next conference call is cancelled and we meet in Bangkok