Re: [woes] New WOES charter proposal

[Anthony Nadalin <[e-mail]>]

Concern is if folks think that the same formats have to be preserved and same algorithms, etc. If it is simply signing and encrypting and that can be done in any format and algorithms then I think we are fine, but it should be made a little clearer and say something like "similar signing and encrypting function that CMS provides"

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Hoffman [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 4:18 PM
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: Anthony Nadalin; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [woes] New WOES charter proposal

On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:06 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:

> And what does it mean to "base it on CMS"? 
> 
> It could, for example, mean that 
> 1) the same functionality as CMS has to be provided (but with a JSON encoding)
> 2) folks should look at CMS to get inspired
> 3) for a chosen subset of CMS that the JSON-based realization must be semantically equivalent (for example, to make translation easy or so)
> 4) re-use of parts is encouraged (such as registries, etc.) 
> 
> What did you had in mind, Paul? 

I was reflecting an earlier message from our AD. On Jun 14, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Sean Turner wrote:

> In Prague, I thought the goal was pretty straightforward: JSONize CMS.


That seems clear to me. It's closer to your #1 above, but the rest of the proposed charter makes it clear that it is a subset of CMS, namely signing and encrypting.

--Paul Hoffman