Re: [Jsdsi-devel] Algorythm names

[Sean R. <sra...@ae...>]

Been thinking and I believe that the Enum way of going is a good idea
and so converted the util classes to them.

So in CVS there is my proposal of how to do things. Let me know what you
think.

Sean


On Sun, 2004-05-30 at 22:14, Sean Radford wrote:
> I guess we could change Algorithms from using straight Strings for the
> constants to an Enum class style for type-safety.
> 
> Something akin to:
> 
> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/api/org/apache/commons/lang/enum/Enum.html
>  
> 
> Sean
> 
> On Sun, 2004-05-30 at 20:52, Sean Radford wrote:
> > Guys,
> > 
> > I've committed to cvs 3 classes in jsdsi.util for handling of algorythm
> > names:
> > 
> > Algorithms
> > DigestUtils
> > SignatureUtils
> > 
> > 
> >  - not implemented any of them yet as want input/comments first.
> > 
> > The idea being that in Algorithms there is a list of constants which
> > clients use to indicate what they desire, e.g. DIGEST_MD5, KEY_RSA, etc.
> > There are then utility methods to calculate the SPKI or JDK versions of
> > such (This includes the problematic Signatures).
> > 
> > I would suggest the following coding ethos is JSDSI:
> > 
> > 1. jsdsi object constructors that need algorythm names use SPKI format
> > names (this is what they should use now as that is the format dumped to
> > Sexpression, and consequently read from a stream)
> > 
> > Not so sure about Hash.. has anyone looked at an Sexpression for hash
> > and know that if you supply MD5 it comes out (incorrectly) in upper case
> > in the Sexpression? I guess the current implementation would cause a
> > problem with SHA-1? (as in SPKI that should be sha1).
> > 
> > Which then begs the question: should Hash.getAlgorithm() return the SPKI
> > or JDK version (I guess JDK to be consistent with Key and Signature)?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 2. static create methods use the constants for easy client use.
> > 
> > The question I have for this is about jsdsi.Signature. Should the create
> > methods take a digest constant and from that calculate the JDK Signature
> > algorythm and corresponding SPKI algorythm using the provided constant
> > and by examining the given keypair?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Thoughts? (in particular problems this approach would lead to with
> > existing applications)
> > 
> > 
> > Sean
> > 
> >  
-- 
Dr. Sean Radford, MBBS, MSc
sra...@ae...
http://www.aegeus-technology.com