Remove CoMID package depedency on CoSWID for any identifiers about corim

[thomas-fossati]

please can you provide a clearer description?

[yogeshbdeshpande]

Architecturally CoMID and CoSWID/SWID are independent units with different purposes.
They may re-use or share types among them. If that is the case one should extract common types which is shared across
these two and move them to common package. This removes the need for using SWID Package inside CoMID package and vice versa!

[thomas-fossati]

Since the dependency is not circular, I don't see the problem with the current arrangement (i.e., CoMID reusing SWID defined types). Note that this is also true at a higher level than the code organisation: CoMID CDDL actually reuses some CoSWID CDDL types.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

Another problem I see is that if someone modifies the base type used inside CoSWID it unknowingly impacts CoMID.

[thomas-fossati]

The assumption we are building on here is that the type is univocally defined by the CoSWID spec.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

Was an OK assumption till the scope of type was restricted to CoSWID specification. Also SWID and CoSWID specification also do not share tag id internally so, if we plan to share among various packages, then best to define them in a common place.

[thomas-fossati]

Was an OK assumption till the scope of type was restricted to CoSWID specification.

Why? It is an OK assumption until the CoSWID spec changes -- which is extremely unlikely at this point in time.

Also SWID and CoSWID specification also do not share tag id internally

I don't think this premise is correct: SWID and CoSWID do in fact share the "tag id" definition (with CoSWID.tag-id being a more stringently typed version of SWID.TagId).

[thomas-fossati]

I think this is OBE?

[nedmsmith]

They share hash-entry with includes alg-id (I'm not sure how the alg-ids are registered such that there is interoperability guarantees)