[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: ISSUE#4: SIGNATUREOPTIONS (SIGN REQUEST DISCUSSION)
ISSUE#3: SignatureOptions Short description: You define the SignatureOptions element as a root child element. And you have suppressed the canonicalizationMethod element that was present in my proposal. My comments: 1.I generaly prefer to stick to the initial design in the f2f meeting, ie, to have an Options root child element and then to include there all the different types of options we may need. So I propose to put this element as child of an Options root child element. 2. You propose to include within SignatureOptions the indication of what properties (and optionally their values) the requester can instruct the server to use. I have to think about. I guess that I could live with that.... 3. I propose to add again the CanonicalizationMethod and SignatureMethod (both of them could be optional just for dealing with the case of a profile already definining them). Justification: the requester may be interested by any reason to instruct the server which canonicalization algorithm it has to use and what signing algorithms to use...And in the simplest case, they will not appear... Regards Juan Carlos.