-
RFC 8949 obsoletes RFC 7049, and the latter is what System.Formats.Cbor is built from.
The revised RFC changes, subtly, the sorting of map keys. The new RFC uses lexicographic sorting, as noted in …
-
The [RFC 8949](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8949) describes the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR). It's a data format whose design goals include the possibility of extremely smal…
-
![Screenshot-2022-02-08-18:45:45](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/20933385/153034560-71df1522-795c-4e71-aa3f-fa6b903db74b.png)
While, [RFC8948](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc89…
-
https://cbor.io cites this repo saying "supports everything mentioned in RFC 7049".
A new edition of RFC 7049 has become available as [RFC 8949](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8949.html).
While t…
-
Application Profiles seem like an unnecessary complexity to me in an area that (I think) we're trying to make simpler.
I look at this draft as a really useful rewording of some important stuff in s…
-
## Introduction
Concise Binary Object Representation, aka. CBOR ([RFC 8949](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8949)) is a data format widely deployed on the web. However there is no standard…
-
See RFC 8949, where JSON is used, CBOR should be supported
-
It would be great if ucan could support CWT as well as JWT for embedded us cases.
This would also pave the way for interoperatbility with attesttation frameworks such as DICE
References:
- CBOR…
-
I believe this specification represents is a brilliant technical solution to an extremely challenging topic that is fundamental to decentralized digital trust infrastructure. In short, I am "sold way …
-
As far as I understand, in RFC 8949, only NEGATIVE numbers are serialized as Type1, but in this implementation, all signed numbers are serialized as type1.
I found this problem when I tried to conver…