> On 8 May 2017, at 15:47, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > > > The downside for pure JSON-based canonicalization is what it has always > been: the signatures only work for JSON; they're not syntax agnostic. > All of our current signatures for Verifiable Claims ARE syntax agnostic, > which provides a certain level of future proofing when JSON goes out of > style. For example, I'm hearing that CBOR is the new hot thing and that > JSON's days are numbered. :) Is it not also that you have to keep the signed document around too, whereas in graph signature you can store your graph in your database (Eg. a quad store) with the signature and ignore dismiss the serialization, meaning you'd end up saving a lot of space. Henry
Received on Monday, 8 May 2017 14:24:10 UTC