W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: X509Data with improved example

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 18:51:16 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com>
Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
At 17:51 9/7/2000 -0400, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote:
>I haven't wrapped the text because I wasn't sure what the best width
>was but white space is ignored in Base64 so spaces and new lines can
>be inserted withough effecting the encoded certifciates.

Editorial question: were these requested? The big globs of data representing 
the cert chain, intermediate cert, and root cert are rather ugly and verbose 
for something that is optional regardless.

In our efforts to keep this document from bloating all out of proportion, we 
don't even include an instance of a valid SignatureValue in-line (they are 
external and referenced), consequently in light of ~terseness I'm not keen 
on having these in-line. If people think it is fundamentally necessary to 
the understanding of this portion of the spec, we could link to them...?

Joseph Reagle Jr.
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 18:51:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:34 UTC