Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose)

I think you missed the point: is it possible not to have to respec signing and 
encryption
for every variant of data model and serialization?

 XML is a document format which makes it a bad choice for a data format.

There are a wide variety of contexts and considerations.

How would you update BCP70 on use of XML? Section 3 covers many of the points.

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), (continued) Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Kathleen Moriarty Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Nico Williams Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Nico Williams Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Carsten Bormann Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Phillip Hallam-Baker Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Joe Hildebrand Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Nico Williams Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Phillip Hallam-Baker Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Larry Masinter Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Phillip Hallam-Baker Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Larry Masinter <= Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Joe Hildebrand Re: [Cose] WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Martin Thomson Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Andrew Newton Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Carsten Bormann Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Andrew Newton Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Phillip Hallam-Baker Re: WG Review: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (cose), Tony Finch