Skip to content

Clarify NATS binding content mode detection - #1399

Open
RAnders00 wants to merge 1 commit into
cloudevents:mainfrom
RAnders00:patch-1
Open

RAnders00 wants to merge 1 commit into
cloudevents:mainfrom
RAnders00:patch-1

Conversation

@RAnders00

@RAnders00 RAnders00 commented Oct 6, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Fixes #1398

Proposed Changes

  • Changes the content-mode detection specified in the NATS binding to explicitly allow a structured syntax suffix as per RFC 6838.
  • Sharpened the requirements around what "prefixed with" means. In the current wording, if the standard says "prefixed with application/cloudevents, one could understand that to include application/cloudevents-batch, which would clearly be incorrect.
  • Also made the wording around case insensitivity more explicit, including a link to the related RFC and using the same wording as in the RFC.

Release Note

No release note is needed, since this detection was not part of v1.0.2.

@RAnders00
RAnders00 force-pushed the patch-1 branch 2 times, most recently from c7165ad to bb74689 Compare October 6, 2026 18:21
@duglin

duglin commented Oct 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

ping @ColinSullivan1

@RAnders00
RAnders00 force-pushed the patch-1 branch 3 times, most recently from 721b488 to e9fb879 Compare October 7, 2026 07:56
Fixes cloudevents#1398

Signed-off-by: Ruben Anders <ruben.anders@robotty.de>
@duglin

duglin commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@RAnders00 thanks for this. Am I correct that if we were to focus on "just the real concern", it's the lack of the word "prefixed" in the NATS section? The rest of it looks like editorial tweaks. Is that correct?

I'm not against editorial tweaks, but I want to make sure we have a clear distinction of "must" vs "nice to have" fixes since the group is trying to minimize changes to the CE specs.

@RAnders00

RAnders00 commented Oct 9, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@duglin Yeah, I think the NATS section needs amending. The other changes are, as you said, editorial tweaks because I looked more into this area and figured these things could be clarified. Apologies if that's uncalled for, I can undo those changes.

@duglin

duglin commented Oct 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

No the changes are fine - I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[NATS binding] Structured-mode Content-Type detection imprecise

2 participants