Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section

Sure, putting it at the top is a good idea.

I meant they can either do a comparison based on a decoded octet
stream or on that stream converted to an arbitrary precision integer.
These might differ in which is considered larger if they are different
(left versus right justification, signs, etc.) but should come out
with the same answer on equal or not.


From:  "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <>
Message-Id:  <>
X-Sender:  reagle@localhost
Date:  Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:05:54 -0400
To:  Donald Eastlake <>
In-Reply-To:  <>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>At 11:28 7/11/2001, Donald Eastlake wrote:
>>Regardless of how things come out with what we recommend
>>for base64, I suggest the addition of some material in
>>3.2 Core Validation as show in the attachment.
>Instead of repeatedly spreading it out, it's not text as the top of the 
>validation section:
>revision: 1.103
>>3.2 Core Validation
>>Comparison of values in reference and signature validation
>>are over the numeric or decoded octet sequence of the value.
>>Different implementations may produce different encoded digest and
>>signature values when processing the same resources because of
>>variances in their encoding, such as accidental white space.
>However, what do you mean by numeric *or* decoded octet?
>Joseph Reagle Jr.       
>W3C Policy Analyst      
>IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair
>W3C XML Encryption Chair

Received on Friday, 27 July 2001 17:44:45 UTC