[Shib-Users] attribute definition for date of birth

[Cantor, Scott]

On 12/5/11 7:03 PM, "Chad La Joie" <lajoie at shibboleth.net> wrote:

>Yep, looks like dashes are optional (didn't realize that).  I believe
>then that means the LDAP general time syntax representing strictly a
>date would be the same as the ISO8601 format without a time or optional
>dashes.

I'm not seeing language in
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/ that suggests this. If
it were true, it would be something you'd want to avoid in any scenario
where signing were involved, because the canonical form of the data type
would almost certainly have the dashes, and any time you have lexical !=
canonical, the chance for failure goes up. This is normally a problem with
base64 data, but it's not the only case like that.

(Of course, XML can carry anything, it's the schema type of date,
dateTime, etc. where this format is specified.)

-- Scott