On Wednesday, February 18, 1998 6:13 AM, jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com
[SMTP:jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com] wrote:
There are no occurrences of "UTF" in the PKIX X.509 Certrificate and
CRL
Profile (aka PKIX Part 1).
Therefore, I recommend that we leave ESS as is:
ESSPrivacyMark ::= CHOICE {
pString PrintableString (SIZE (1..ub-privacy-mark-length)),
utf8String OCTET STRING
-- If utf8String is used, the contents must be in UTF-8 [UTF8]
}
John, I respectfully disagree.
1. UTF-8 has a universal tag number, and a defined syntax in the 1997
ASN.1 draft which is in the rubber stamp part of the standards process
(that is, the UTF-8 part of the standard will most likely not change at
all).
2. If we use the OCTET STRING hack, we will drag it along forever.
Every future implementation will have to understand that this OCTET
STRING really contains UTF-8 text. We are at a point where we can avoid
this.
Personally, I believe that PKIX should switch to the UTF-8 universal tag
instead of OCTET STRING. There is no reason to use an octet hole (as
multiple people refer to it) when a suitable type can be used.
Maintaining parity with PKIX in this case does not seem to be useful. I
will bring this up on the PKIX mailing list, and see if there are any
comments.
Blake
--
Blake C. Ramsdell
Worldtalk Corporation
For current info, check http://www.deming.com/users/blaker
Voice +1 425 882 8861 x103 Fax +1 425 882 8060