[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [email@example.com: Re: SDSI syntax]
>SDSI allows one to express octet strings in several forms:
> tokens: abc
> quoted-string: "abc"
> hexadecimal: #616263 (starts with sharp sign)
> base-64: =YWRj (starts with equals sign)
> verbatim: #03:abc (that is, length:value)
> decimal: 6382179
>These are all equivalent. Parsing is trivial.
This raises a question, do we want to sign a cannonical form or not? S
expressions should make conversion to a canonical form pretty cheap. Provided of
course the canonical form isn't something derranged like DER which require
multiple passes over the data.
If we can come up with a mechanism for converting to a canonical form in a
linear manner (i.e. the transformation can be performed by and FSR) I think it
would be a worthwhile thing to do. The finer points of Ron's syntax would then
be conveniences and there would be less need to argue over them.
I would suggest for a canonical form removing all syntactically unnecessary
whitespace and expressing all octet strings as tokens or in hexadecimal. (modulo
some wording to clean this up).