Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should CDDL be used as the Data Definition Language to formalize the constraints of the Abstract Data Model? #153

Closed
jonnycrunch opened this issue Nov 9, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@jonnycrunch
Copy link
Contributor

How can we best provide unambiguous definitions and constraints on the Abstract Data Model such that it can be best used by implementers?

I have worked hard building out all aspects of the DID spec and found that CDDL (RFC 8610) is the most robust to solve this and I would like to propose it to concretely constrain the Abstract Data Model.

Some debate that should be discussed include:

  • is CDDL sufficiently expressive to cover all representations ( CBOR, JSON, JSON-LD, YAML)?
  • or should the CDDL be used for per-representation/per-MIME type basis?
@jonnycrunch
Copy link
Contributor Author

Resolved vie #138. CDDL is for JSON and CBOR, not ADM.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants
@jonnycrunch and others