Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Date
draft-ietf-cbor-date-tag-07

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: cbor@ietf.org, cbor-chairs@ietf.org, francesca.palombini@ericsson.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, barryleiba@gmail.com, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-cbor-date-tag@ietf.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Date' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-cbor-date-tag-07.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags for Date'
  (draft-ietf-cbor-date-tag-07.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Concise Binary Object Representation
Maintenance and Extensions Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Murray Kucherawy and Barry Leiba.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cbor-date-tag/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary:
   In CBOR, one point of extensibility is the definition of CBOR tags.
   RFC 7049 defines two tags for time: CBOR tag 0 (RFC 3339 date/time
   string) and tag 1 (Posix "seconds since the epoch").  Since then,
   additional requirements have become known.  This specification
   defines a CBOR tag for an RFC 3339 date text string, for applications
   needing a textual date representation within the Gregorian calendar
   without a time.  It also defines a CBOR tag for days since the date
   1970-01-01 in the Gregorian calendar for applications needing a
   numeric date representation without a time.  This specification is
   intended as the reference document for IANA registration of the CBOR
   tags defined.

Working Group Summary:
There was some discussion in the WG about the difference between calendar
days, for which this specification registers tags, and points in time.   The chairs
have suggested that more text be added about it, see
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/Z4nwfurN7-L0l4uLPdR-XV91IGk/

Document Quality:
A number of WG participants have stated they have read and reviewed the
document. A WG participant has mentioned an implementation has been done.

Personnel:
Document Shepherd: Francesca Palombini
Responsible AD: Barry Leiba

RFC Editor Note