Add cbor2 to implementation list

[zensh]

Add cbor2 to the Rust implementations list on https://cbor.io/impls.html with links to crates.io and GitHub.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds the Rust cbor2 library to the CBOR implementations page (impls.html) so visitors can discover it alongside other Rust CBOR crates.

Changes:

• Added a new Rust implementation entry for cbor2.
• Included links to the crate on crates.io and the source repository on GitHub.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[cabo]

Now you got me curious: How do you do validation? (I'm asking because maybe there should be an adjective there that reveals this.)

[zensh]

Thank you — that is a good question, and I realize “validation” was too vague here.

What I meant is cbor2::validate: it checks that the input is exactly one well-formed CBOR item, including structural validity, nesting limits, text UTF-8, and no trailing bytes, without deserializing into a Rust type. So it is meant as a lightweight well-formedness / exact-one-item validation pass, not schema or application-level validation.

Would “well-formedness validation” or “exact-one-item validation” be a better phrase here? I’m happy to adjust the wording.

[cabo]

", with separately available well-formedness check" would be a good summary, I think.
(Validation usually implies conformance to some application protocol.)

[cabo]

"COSE integer keys and arrays" is a weird combination -- I'm assuming you support integer keys for maps, like they are used in COSE and many other protocols, and arrays (but is the latter noteworthy?)

[zensh]

You are right — I compressed several things into a phrase that reads oddly.

What I meant is that #[derive(cbor2::Cbor)] supports integer map keys, such as the labels used by COSE / CWT-style structures, and also CBOR tags. Separately, it can represent array-shaped structs, which is useful for COSE-like structures such as COSE_Sign1, but “arrays” by itself is probably not noteworthy enough in this list.

I can reword this to something like:

“COSE-style integer map keys, semantic tags, and derive support for tagged / array-shaped structures”

or simply:

“COSE-style integer map keys and semantic tags”

if you prefer the shorter version.

[zensh]

Thank you, that makes sense. I updated the summary to use “with separately available well-formedness check”, and also aligned the cbor2 README / Cargo metadata with this wording.

If this looks good now, would you mind merging it? Thanks again for the careful review.