RE: [leslie@thinkingcat.com: Re: OIDs as URI/URNs....]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Michael Mealling
> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 6:43 PM
> To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
> Subject: [leslie@thinkingcat.com: Re: OIDs as URI/URNs....]
>
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com> -----
>
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U)
> X-Accept-Language: en
> Approved-By:  Leslie Daigle <leslie@THINKINGCAT.COM>
> Date:         Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:45:16 -0500
> Reply-To: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
> From: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
> Organization: ThinkingCat Enterprises
> Subject:      Re: OIDs as URI/URNs....
> To: URN-IETF@LISTS.NETSOL.COM
>
> (I'm not cross-posting, 'cause <your> listserv stripped the
> XMLDSIG list address cc: off your posting, and I don't know what
> it is :-)
>
> I'd have some concern about:  what happens when there is discrepancy
> between the digit and textual representations (i.e., it's an
> error).

you can never prevent anyone from making errors in principle. but i admit
that you should try to, if we can. but it's the same, if you encode an OID
in an ASN.1 specification: no one prevents you from writing wrong OIDs.

>
> I'm not entirely sure that the XML problem couldn't be solved by
> a convention of a comment line that accompanies any identifier,
> to spell out what they need.

i don't think that a comment is the actual solution we are talking about (at
least not me). because for a comment, we need not to discuss the syntax.
but, comments will of course be used additionally where applicable.

regards

  Karl Scheibelhofer

--

Karl Scheibelhofer, <mailto:Karl.Scheibelhofer@iaik.at>
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications (IAIK)
at Technical University of Graz, Austria, http://www.iaik.at
Phone: (+43) (316) 873-5540

Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 02:47:00 UTC