+1 each to Carsten and Nat’s comments. 

Phil

On Nov 23, 2018, at 1:42 PM, Carsten Bormann <[email protected]> wrote:

>> The problem set is described, here is a short version:
>> - Keeping signed JSON in JSON format
> 
> But that is not a problem, just a preference.
> (The cognitive dissonance of drowning in base64 also is a bit smaller with 
> COSE.)
> 
>> - Enabling a consistent message structure regardless if messages are signed 
>> or not
> 
> That is an even more questionable preference.
> 
>> - Supporting signed JavaScript objects
> 
> I’m not sure I understand that.
> (I know how to sign a JavaScript Object when represented in JSON.  What else 
> do you want to do?)
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_jose&d=DwIGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=VVjG5M8wVvqKvp_6BXxQE9xFQLiIt-G2MLVX_HTrlzc&s=WayjNDVFZ2v-xTnNDnBpxRAZ1i0cP83nJffQt_4ef8Y&e=

_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

Reply via email to