- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:53:28 +0200
- To: "Priestley, Mark, VF-Group" <Mark.Priestley@vodafone.com>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Babbage, Steve, VF-Group" <Steve.Babbage@vodafone.com>
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group <Mark.Priestley@vodafone.com> wrote: > Hi Frederick, All, > > Vodafone supports the move to support ECDSA in XML Signature 1.1 [2] and > welcomes the new clarifying text. Vodafone will not object to > ECDSAwithSHA256 being specified as mandatory [2] however we would like > to propose that it is a recommended algorithm in Widgets 1.0: Digital > Signatures [5] (e.g. a SHOULD). Sorry, it doesn't make sense to have them as a "should" in this context. Either they are in or out because in practice engines will need to support all prescribed algorithms. Lets keep to the smallest possible subset of most commonly used algorithms in 1.0; every algorithm we add makes this specification more difficult/expensive to implement, adds more points of failure, etc. If the market shifts to new algorithms, then we can add those later in a new draft. Kind regards, Marcos -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 07:54:22 UTC