Re: X509Data with improved example

Well, I think it would be OK to replace the bulk of the Base64
in each of the three certs with an ellipsis ("...").


From:  "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <>
Resent-Date:  Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:51:34 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Message-Id:  <>
Message-Id:  <>
Date:  Thu, 07 Sep 2000 18:51:16 -0400
To:  "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <>
In-Reply-To:  <>

>At 17:51 9/7/2000 -0400, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote:
>>I haven't wrapped the text because I wasn't sure what the best width
>>was but white space is ignored in Base64 so spaces and new lines can
>>be inserted withough effecting the encoded certifciates.
>Editorial question: were these requested? The big globs of data representing 
>the cert chain, intermediate cert, and root cert are rather ugly and verbose 
>for something that is optional regardless.
>In our efforts to keep this document from bloating all out of proportion, we 
>don't even include an instance of a valid SignatureValue in-line (they are 
>external and referenced), consequently in light of ~terseness I'm not keen 
>on having these in-line. If people think it is fundamentally necessary to 
>the understanding of this portion of the spec, we could link to them...?
>Joseph Reagle Jr.
>W3C Policy Analyst      
>IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair

Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 19:41:32 UTC