Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Typed Arrays
draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-08
Yes
(Barry Leiba)
No Objection
(Alissa Cooper)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Magnus Westerlund)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Éric Vyncke
Yes
Comment
(2019-10-02 for -07)
Sent
Based on Henk Birkholz's review for the IoT directorate. Thank you Carsten for this well-written and concise ;-) document and thank you Henk for the review. -éric
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment
(2019-10-01 for -07)
Sent
Section 1.1. Per “this document uses the notation familiar from the programming language C” and subsequent reference in Section 3.1, please provide a reference to the relevant C standard. Section 3.2. Please provide a reference for a version of C++. Section 8.2. Per [TypedArray], please provide a URL or more complete citation
Adam Roach Former IESG member
(was No Objection)
Yes
Yes
(2019-10-01 for -07)
Sent
§2.1: > | s | 0 for unsigned integer or float, 1 for signed integer | This is a very minor comment, since it is clear from the remainder of the document, but this would be a bit easier to read as "0 for float or unsigned integer, 1 for signed integer" (thereby making it clear that "unsigned" is not intended to apply to "float").
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(2019-09-23 for -07)
Not sent
[TypedArrayES6] - this should be a Normative reference due to definition of Clamped arithmetic.
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Not sent
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Benjamin Kaduk Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-09-30 for -07)
Sent
Section 3.1.2 I don't think we can get away with defining column-major order implicitly by example and comparison to row-major order. This is particularly poingiant given that we do not limit ourselves to two-dimensional arrays. Section 7 I'm not sure that I understand the scenariao described by "an attacker might substitute a Uint8ClampedArray" and how an application would get unexpected processing semantics, but the general sentiment it indicates of "applications need to verify any expectations they have" seems important to cover. Section 8.2 I couldn't find a document to go with [TypedArray]; the one promising-looking search result ended up just redirecting me to [TypedArrayES6].
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Martin Vigoureux Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-09-30 for -07)
Sent
Hello,
thank you for this document. I have a minor question.
IEEE 754 binary floating numbers are always signed. Therefore, for
the float variants ("f" == 1), there is no need to distinguish
between signed and unsigned variants; the "s" bit is always zero.
Since IEEE 754 binary floating numbers are always signed, I would have thought that s=1 would be used in conjunction with f=1. For my understanding, what was the reason for choosing s=0 instead?
Thank you