[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xcbf] Ballot
> -----Original Message----- > From: Phillip H. Griffin [mailto:phil.griffin@asn-1.com] > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 20:00 > To: Alessandro Triglia > Cc: [OASIS XCBF] > Subject: Re: [xcbf] Ballot > > > Alessandro, > > I agree that we can not make major changes to the ASN.1 > modules at this point in the process, without suffering > significant delay. But my description of an approach was more > theoretical and less practical than Ed's. His was to simply > transfer Base64 in the octet string. I have a very strong preference for your approach. Far from being theoretical, it is definitely the right way to go. Let's move on, please. Alessandro > > Ed's approach allows us to implement XCBF now (in his tools > and yours using a directive) with no changes to our > applications later if we add the encoding control notation to > the module. This gives us a seamless way forward with no > impact on products. > > Phil > > > Alessandro Triglia wrote: > > >Phil, > > > >Your comment below indicates a simple solution to some of the issues > >that I and others have raised. > > > >--------------- > >[...] This data, then represented as hexadecimal > >characters, can be subsequently transformed by a receiving > >application into Base64 characters. [...] On encoding these binary > >objects, they can be encoded directly into the hexadecimal > >representation required by the OCTET STRING type specified > in the XCBF > >ASN.1 Schema, then converted after schema validation into > Base64 by the > >recipient. > >--------------- > > > >So we agree that base-64 is NOT used in the actual XML > messages being > >exchanged. So we do NOT change the ASN.1 modules. > > > >How shall we proceed in relation to the other comments? > > > >Alessandro > > > > > > > > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]