Re: [woes] Proposed charter, post-Quebec edition

[Joe Hildebrand <[e-mail]>]

That was the original intent, yes.  Any octets, including UTF-8 serialized
JSON, XML, or a picture of a cat.  A *very secure* picture of a cat.


On 8/4/11 3:25 PM, "Richard L. Barnes" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> My understanding was that a JOSE data structure would protect a sequence of
> octets, which could be whatever the signer/encryptor desires.
> 
> JOSE:JSON::CMS:ASN.1
> 
> --Richard 
> 
> 
> On Aug 3, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 14:35 -0600, Matt Miller wrote:
>>> On Aug 3, 2011, at 14:33, Thomas Hardjono wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Paul,
>>>> 
>>>> Looks good.
>>>> 
>>>> Just my clarification, looking at 1) and 2) does it mean that the
>>>> resulting JOSE WG specifications can be applied to non-JSON data
>>>> structures? (I'm ok with this).
>>> 
>>> Yes; at least one of the desired uses is to sign/encrypt XMPP stanzas! (-:
>>> 
>> 
>> For my edification, why would JOSE want to concern itself with
>> representations of other media types, rather than allowing other
>> transformations to deal with this?
>> 
>> Put another way, if there were a method of encapsulating and encoding
>> non-JSON media types in a JSON structure, would JOSE seek to reinvent such a
>> thing, or merely defer to using it?
>> 
>> Paul
>> _______________________________________________
>> woes mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes
> 
> _______________________________________________
> woes mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes

-- 
Joe Hildebrand