Re: [xcbf] Discussion document on XCBF spec

[John Larmouth <j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk>]

The document is currently inconsistent, Ed.  Do we intend CXER encoding 
for everything excpet DER, or use of basic XER at the outer-level?

I think minimum changes mean we do everything with CXER (and DER), and 
remove any text that implies the opposite - probably only a sentence or 
two, at most.

I will produce a document to that effect in the next few days.

John L

Ed Day wrote:
> I think given this late date that changes should be kept to a minimum.  What
> is there has already been approved for the most part.  Only a few tweaks
> describing how the Base64 encoding is to be accomplished should be
> necessary.  I think any big changes need to be deferred to the next version.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ed Day
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Larmouth" <j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk>
> To: <j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk>
> Cc: "xcbf" <xcbf@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2003 4:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [xcbf] Discussion document on XCBF spec
> 
> 
> 
>>To reply to my own message:
>>
>>John Larmouth wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I understand that you should be getting notification of that upload
>>>automatically, but it has not come back to *me* yet.
>>
>>It still has not come (but I understand that others have got it).  Maybe
>>the person posting the document does not get the noticiation?  But this
>>is not the first time that OASIS mailings have taken a couple of days to
>>reach me when others have got them (don't know why - guess the server is
>>anti-English!).
>>
>>
>>>(There is no formal mechanism - even with Amendment 1 in place - to
>>>formally forbid a HEX encoding.  You can allow a BASE64 encoding as an
>>>encoder's option, but you cannot express formally that you require
>>>(only) that to be used instead of HEX.
>>
>>I got this wrong - getting too old!  The BASE64 encoding instruction
>>*does* prohibit use of HEX (otherwise we would have ambiguous
>>encodings), but it does NOT mandate BASE64 - use of XML mark-up for the
>>contents is still allowed as an encoders option.
>>
>>Sorry for the wrong information.
>>
>>(I don't think this affects the main discussion on what we want for XCBF.)
>>
>>John L
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
PLEASE NOTE - As an anti-SPAM measure, e-mails will shortly
not be accepted by my machine from an unknown sender unless
the subject contains the phrase "Hi John".

If you pass my e-mail address to others (which I am very happy
for you to do) please tell them to include this phrase in the
subject line of their first mailing to me.  Thanks.

    Prof John Larmouth
    Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
    (Training and Protocol Development Services Ltd)
    1 Blueberry Road
    Bowdon                               j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk
    Cheshire WA14 3LS                    (put "Hi John" in subject)
    England			
    Tel: +44 161 928 1605		Fax: +44 161 928 8069