Re: p:encrypt and p:decrypt

"James Fuller" <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> writes:

> I think its important to make a distinction between text encryption
> and xml encryption ... conflating everything into a single p:encrypt
> is probably a mistake so I propose;
>
> <p:encrypt/> and <p:decrypt/>

How would text encryption work, the result would surely be a blob of
data not an XML document. I suppose <c:data> wrappers could be put
around it, but has anyone asked for this?

> <p:xml-encryption/> and <p:xml-decryption/> ... I am unsure about the
> adoption of xml encryption, perhaps its a slow burn and we should see
> more and more usage over time ... don't know, but I do know how it
> works and did some significant work with it a few years back.
>
> If you would like I can try and come up with a signature for all these steps ?

Personally, I'd love to see an example of the signatures for XML DSig
and some examples of what they'd actually look like when being used.

Note that Mohamed took a stab at it too:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008Aug/0097.html

But since I've never been able to figure out how to use any of the DSig
toolkits, I don't really have any experience on which to judge them.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Endurance is frequently a form of
http://nwalsh.com/            | indecision.--Elizabeth Bibesco