W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Lift additional RetrievalMethod type values from RFC 4051?

From: Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 09:45:50 -0500
To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Cc: XMLSec WG <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-id: <4990419E.1080309@sun.com>

I don't think we should add any more RetrievalMethod types if we are 
thinking of deprecating or changing RetrievalMethod in 2.0. Adding more 
types means we have to add interop tests which seems like a waste of 
resources.

--Sean

Thomas Roessler wrote:
> RFC 4051, section 3.2 defines a number of additional RetrievalMethod 
> Type values, some of which correspond to elements in XML Signature.
> 
>> Identifiers:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyValue
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#RetrievalMethod
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyName
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawX509CRL
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPGPKeyPacket
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawSPKISexp
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsigmore#PKCS7signedData
>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPKCS7signedData 
> 
> Shall we lift any (or all) of these into XML Signature 1.1?
> 
> Should they be covered in the algorithms cross-reference?
> 
> Thanks,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org <mailto:tlr@w3.org>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 9 February 2009 14:46:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:57 GMT