CBOR Serialization Format
The cluster centers on discussions of CBOR as a compact binary alternative to JSON for data serialization, frequently comparing it to MessagePack, highlighting its IETF standardization, features like tags, and adoption over other formats.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
CBOR is a pretty good middle ground
No, CBOR should not replace MessagePack. The CBOR spec was written without the participation of the MessagePack community or the consent of its creator. CBOR added a number of questionable and unpopular features that lacked community consensus such as variable-length arrays and maps, or prefix tags for an arbitrary list of semantic types (URI, mimetype, base64, etc.) It also proposes various levels of strictness and canonicalization such as key sorting of maps based on binary representation. All
Why not use a saner protocol than JSON, e.g. CBOR?
You mean like CBOR?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBOR
Sounds cool. How does it differ from CBOR?
Lot of json packages support CBOR
We already have CBOR and other binary JSONs.
Surprised nobody mentioned CBOR (http://cbor.io) yet. Aka RFC 7049 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7049).
I'd rather use CBOR instead of JSON when doing anything outside the browser that doesn't need to be human editable
Related. Others?Begrudgingly Choosing CBOR over MessagePack - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43229259 - March 2025 (78 comments)MessagePack vs. CBOR (RFC7049) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23838565 - July 2020 (2 comments)CBOR – Concise Binary Object Representation - <a href