Ambiguous text in 8.2 (OBJECT_DATAGRAM)

[lminiero]

The definition of OBJECT_DATAGRAM has a payload length field:

Object Payload Length (i),

This was added, IIRC, in v06 of the spec. The new draft, though, has text at the end of that section that says:

There is no explicit length field. The entirety of the transport datagram following Publisher Priority contains the Object Payload.

As such, it's not clear how OBJECT_DATAGRAM should be serialized in practice.

[suhasHere]

yes this is confusing. We need payload length to identify status of the object IIUC.

+1 to clarify the text to remove the last sentence

[afrind]

We need payload length to identify status of the object IIUC.

In draft-08 the payload length does not indicate the presence or absence of status codes. Instead, there are two OBJECT_DATAGRAM* types, one for NORMAL objects, and one for non-NORMAL.

See #552 and #625.

[afrind]

Now we have four issues tracking this mixup:

#683 #684 #693