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" <[email protected]> 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 >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes > > _______________________________________________ > woes mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes -- Joe Hildebrand _______________________________________________ woes mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes
