Man, we've been all around this #$%^ UTF8String mess. The current ESS uses:
UTF8String ::= [UNIVERSAL 12] IMPLICIT OCTET STRING
. . .
ESSPrivacyMark ::= CHOICE {
pString PrintableString (SIZE (1..ub-privacy-mark-length)),
utf8String UTF8String
}
This poses a problem for people whose ASN.1 compiler is unable to do the
first part (namely the OSS compiler). So now people have asked instead for:
ESSPrivacyMark ::= CHOICE {
pString PrintableString (SIZE (1..ub-privacy-mark-length)),
utf8String [0] IMPLICIT UTF8String
}
without the UNIVERSAL 12 defintion. Before I do this, however, I want to
check: whose compilers will choke on this? I would imagine that some would,
because the thing after the IMPLICIT is undefined. If no one's compiler
chokes on this, I'd say we can go with it, but if some people's compilers
die, then we're gonna have to get creative.
On a related issue: why do people who support the second format want "[0]"?
This is unneeded since there's no chance the item will get confused with
the PrintableString.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium