| 30 Jul 2025 |
 John Ericson | oh the RFC exists, but nlohmann doesn't yet implement it | 14:59:16 |
 emily | (from the last time this came up, including my strong warning against canonicalized JSON formats and suggestions for alternatives) | 15:00:26 |
| emily | the good thing about JSON canonicalization schemes is that there are so many to pick from! | 15:00:54 |
| John Ericson | emily: how about CBOR? | 15:09:51 |
| John Ericson | Robert Hensing (roberth) was once concerned that making it binary would be a humans debugging drawback | 15:10:24 |
| emily | mentioned here (there's also three versions of that spec unfortunately) | 15:10:39 |
| John Ericson | to be clear, we need a parser that validates the canonical format | 15:11:19 |
| John Ericson | it is not good enough to make just the serializer do the thing | 15:11:31 |
| emily | IMO textual formats are good but you need to keep them separate from the non-malleable canonical forms since the two are pretty in tension. Preserves does this. (though again I doubt Preserves is appealing for direct adoption given lack of ecosystem, it's just the measuring stick for these things in my view) | 15:11:38 |
