On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 02:52:06PM -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > It did not need to be this way. Many of us who commented on CBOR said that > we do not want any encoding that changes the JSON data model. In fact the > only limitations we find in JSON are the need to perform escaping on string > literals and the lack of a binary blob type. Rather than develop a [...] Also inefficiency as to numbers. In a binary protocol ideally numbers could be sent in whatever format is easiest for the sender (e.g., little-endian IEEE754 doubles). All I wanted was: chunking for strings, which effectively takes care of the need for a binary type, and binary numbers. CBOR added a datetime type, optional tagging of items, and who knows what else. > IESG should reject this WG proposal and all future proposals of this type. +1 to this and Sam's take. Nico --