There are two or more "they"... ASN.1 should never be MTI in JOSE nor WebCrypto. It is ok to use as a blob maybe but when either WG specifies something that requires ASN.1 parsing then we are on the wrong track I think. Am 13.08.2012 18:30 schrieb "Hannes Tschofenig" <[email protected] >:
> > On Aug 12, 2012, at 9:56 PM, Jim Schaad wrote: > > >> 2) While we'd like encourage the use of JOSE over ASN.1, it seems like > > for > >> backwards compatibility having some level of ASN.1 support would be > useful > >> and we *need* a format that allows key material (both private and > >> public) to be exported. Folks seem to leaning towards ASN.1 as a default > >> format in the low-level API, and having JWK as a format that can be > built > > on > >> top of that in a possible high-level API. Would that be OK? > > > This is really interesting! > > The entire work on JSON signing and encryption was started since the Web > and browser guys told us that there no way they would ever want to use > ASN.1. Completely impossible - not compatible with the way how Web > applications are developed these days, and so on. > > > Now, they ask for ASN.1 support. > > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose >
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
