rewrite a bit of the introduction, explain why heuristics are necessary #14
Conversation
cbor-file-magic.mkd
Outdated
|
|
||
| As CBOR becomes a more and more common encoding for a wide variety of artifacts, identifying them as just "CBOR" is probably not sufficient. | ||
| This document provides a way to encode a magic number into the beginning of a CBOR format file. | ||
| Two possible methods of enveloping data are presented: a CBOR Protocol author will specify one. | ||
| (A CBOR Protocol is a specification which uses CBOR as its encoding.) | ||
|
|
||
| A third method is also proposed by which this CBOR format prepended tag is used to identify non-CBOR files. | ||
| This third method has been placed in an appendix because it is not really about CBOR. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It actually is about CBOR: Using CBOR to tag non-CBOR data.
cbor-file-magic.mkd
Outdated
| This third method has been placed in an appendix because it is not really about CBOR. | ||
|
|
||
| This entire document is a Best Current Practice: it gives advice to designers of CBOR protocols on identifying their contents. | ||
| This entire document is therefore informative, but the {{headers}} appendix is even more informative . |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The intention of this document is to define a standard for how to do this. This doesn't get less normative by the existence of other standards in this space. It's not a BCP because there is no C...
cbor-file-magic.mkd
Outdated
| @@ -63,11 +63,14 @@ is friendly to common on-disk recognition systems such as the Unix file(1) comma | |||
| # Introduction | |||
|
|
|||
| Since very early in computing, operating systems have sought ways to mark which files could be processed by which programs. | |||
| At one point, files were all record orientated and the operating system enforced this. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, this is a somewhat categorical statement that is not true at that level. There were "Access methods", some of which were record-based, some of which weren't.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
my intent here is to say that, at the beginning of time, the OS knew how to process every file, and then when we went to everything is a stream of bytes, we lost this. Maybe this isn't worth saying at all?
|
I pushed a slightly less radical amputation, which leaves the connection to the following text intact. |
No description provided.