Elwyn:
Thank you for the careful review. My earlier message responded to the nits. This message responds to your more significant comment.
> Summary: Almost ready with one minor issue and several nits. I do not
> understand how it is decided what the count of bstr fields is which is needed
> to determine if the other_fields mechanism is invoked. Are all the standard
> fields included? And could other_fields be included in an example please?
> Constructing an example would be helpful for both author and users I think.
>
> Major issues:
> None
>
> Minor issues:
> s3.3, description of 'other_fields': I am confused as to which bstr's count
> towards the 'only two' condition. All the fields after 'context' are encoded
> as bstr so are all these involved in the count? Also I couldn't see an example
> which appeared to showcase how 'other_fields' is used. This might well have
> helped.
In the first paragraph of Section 3.3, the countersignature target structure is defined to be one of these: COSE_Signature, COSE_Sign1, COSE_Sign, COSE_Mac, COSE_Mac0, COSE_Encrypt, or COSE_Encrypt0.
Then, the other_fields description says:
other_fields: If there are only two bstr fields in the target
structure, this field is omitted. The field is an array of all
bstr fields after the second. As an example, this would be an
array of one element for the COSE_Sign1 structure containing the
signature value.
Would it help to say "countersignature target structure" instead of the abbreviated "target structure"?
Russ
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
