Wider range of data types - Ion supports decimals, symbols, blobs, and clobs which don't exist in CBOR.
Optional schemas and annotations - Ion allows attaching type/schema information to data for validation purposes. CBOR has no schema support.
Text format - Ion provides a human-readable text format for data interchange, CBOR is binary only.
Maturity - Ion has been used in production at Amazon since 2009, CBOR is a newer standard (RFC 7049 in 2014).
Language support - More mature library ecosystem around Ion vs CBOR which is still gaining adoption.
Pros of CBOR vs Ion:
Standardized - CBOR is an IETF standard, Ion is an Amazon-proprietary format.
Simplicity - CBOR has a smaller set of basic data types making it simpler to implement.
Used in other standards - CBOR is used in data formats like COSE for crypto operations and CWT for web tokens.
Efficiency - The CBOR binary format can have a smaller encoding size than Ion's.
JSON interoperability - CBOR is designed to be a JSON-compatible binary format. Ion is JSON-like but not fully compatible.
In summary, Ion has richer data typing and schema capabilities and a long production history. But CBOR is simpler, standardized, and gaining momentum - especially in crypto and web standards using it as a binary encoding basis.
So Ion may be better for applications dealing with complex, annotated data. But CBOR has advantages for an efficient binary interchange format, particularly when standards compatibility is important.
Wider range of data types - Ion supports decimals, symbols, blobs, and clobs which don't exist in CBOR. Optional schemas and annotations - Ion allows attaching type/schema information to data for validation purposes. CBOR has no schema support. Text format - Ion provides a human-readable text format for data interchange, CBOR is binary only. Maturity - Ion has been used in production at Amazon since 2009, CBOR is a newer standard (RFC 7049 in 2014). Language support - More mature library ecosystem around Ion vs CBOR which is still gaining adoption.
Pros of CBOR vs Ion:
Standardized - CBOR is an IETF standard, Ion is an Amazon-proprietary format. Simplicity - CBOR has a smaller set of basic data types making it simpler to implement. Used in other standards - CBOR is used in data formats like COSE for crypto operations and CWT for web tokens. Efficiency - The CBOR binary format can have a smaller encoding size than Ion's. JSON interoperability - CBOR is designed to be a JSON-compatible binary format. Ion is JSON-like but not fully compatible.
In summary, Ion has richer data typing and schema capabilities and a long production history. But CBOR is simpler, standardized, and gaining momentum - especially in crypto and web standards using it as a binary encoding basis.
So Ion may be better for applications dealing with complex, annotated data. But CBOR has advantages for an efficient binary interchange format, particularly when standards compatibility is important.