XML in PKIX. Was: OCSP-X vs SCVP

["Anders Rundgren" <anders.rundgren@xxxxxxxxx>]

RE: OCSP-X vs SCVPKhaja,

<snip>

>The XML community I am referring to and am aware of is a group of financial institutions.  
>(There may be others)  These financial institutions have a group of application and solution
> developers within their ranks who (most of them) know and love XML.  They prefer to avoid
>dealing with ASN.1.  This XML community finds it easier to read, deal with and encode
>information in XML.  They are able to debug protocol implementation problems where XML
>encoding is used. They know and are comfortable with XMLDSIG and use that rather than
>PKCS#7 to send signed transactions back and forth.  They have plans to use delegated path
>validation so they will not be doing PKIX section 6.1 stuff locally.  They want to increasingly move
>towards a set of protocols that use XML encoding for these reasons.  

I would say that this statement is valid for the e-business sector in general. 

According to some notable persons on this list, XML-encoded systems are not
the target for PKIX as it is based on ISO-standards which currently are ASN.1-based.

Steve K et al: Is'nt time to "adjust" the scope of PKIX and make the "X" not only refer
to "X"500 but to "X"ML? 

<snip>

Regards
Anders