- From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 22:54:03 +0200
- To: <cantor.2@osu.edu>
- CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Scott You raised a Last Call issue on XML Signature 1.1 related to the ECPointType schema definition. This issue was recorded as LC-2390, <http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42458/WD-xmldsig-core1-20100204/2390> The WG discussed this on 15 June, <http://www.w3.org/2010/06/15-xmlsec-minutes.html#item04> WG members noted that the reason for the different type is to highlight different semantics and processing rules. In particular CryptoBinary retains leading 0's (unlike Base64) and ECPointType is two points in one binary representation, and could possibly have compression. This is the rationale for a new type and this approach is already in use. Thus the WG believes this issue is closed and resolved with no action. Please confirm that you agree (this is for the disposition of Last Call comments record). Thanks regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch, Nokia Chair XML Security WG
Received on Monday, 21 June 2010 20:54:50 UTC