Re: [xcbf] SignedData Attributes - DigitalSignature Attributes

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

Phil Griffin wrote:

> Not at all. I am looking at conforming to cXER for the
> cryptographic payloads in X9.84 and XCBF. 

Good.

> All else need
> only be valid XML really, though basing as closely as
> possible to XER would seem to be more simple.

I think you mean well-formed and not valid in that sentence.

But the sentence is not true if you are using ASN.1 as the schema.  The
XML needs to be valid against the ASN.1 schema (using either XER, CXER,
or the more flexible VXER), not just well-formed.

That is what this argument is about.  If you invent random XML, what is
your schema definition?

John L