On 2011/09/30 1:33, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
OK, I will rev the draft to make it text identifiers.
Great!
I will also check up on the uri syntax issues. Base64 uses two non ascii characters and these need to be checked for legality.
These are '+' and '/'. As for '+', this is a sub-delim in RFC 3986, but I don't see any problem in using it, unless you create a query-part syntax and expect users to enter it in HTML forms (In which case you would get hit by the space->'+' conversion).
The '/' is somewhat different, because it's heavily involved in resolution of relative references,... But even there, I don't see a problem if we never have a '/' (or worse, two or more) after the initial colon. And relative references won't make sense for digests anyway, as far as I understand.
We might also reduce the length of the scheme name maybe? digest is 6 chars, do we need them all?
The shortest you could go is just one character, 'd'. But frankly, I don't understand why we need to be short and opaque. This would be another thing if the term we started was 10 or 20 characters long.
I would also like to see if we can ditch the urn: prefix legally, it was bogus from the start, names and locators are not disjoint categories.
Just go ahead and ditch it. Regards, Martin. _______________________________________________ websec mailing list websec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec
