- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:59:31 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 29/09/11 14:06, Andy Seaborne wrote: > Reduce the number of library (required) functions to > > Please put your (+1 | 0 | -1) on each of: > > Proposal 1: > SHA1 > MD5 > > Proposal 2: > SHA1 > MD5 > SHA256 > > Proposal 3: > SHA1 > MD5 > SHA256 > SHA512 > > Proposal 4: > Other (with details) > > > Variations: leave the other functions in as "informative, not required" > and leave the keywords in the grammar. > > Andy > Sandro came up with: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core2/#sec-MessageDigests which mentions certain SHAx algorithms so it gives us an external reason for choosing a certain set: Proposal 5: MD5 SHA1 SHA256 SHA512 SHA384 SHA512 (i.e. remove SHA224, but that's the problmeatic one for the commenter (Jeen) because it's not in the core Java runtime). http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/ http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/security/StandardNames.html#MessageDigest Do any programming languages have problems with this set? Andy
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2011 15:00:12 UTC