module function · N/crypto/certificate
signXml()
certificate.signXml(options)
Signs the input XML string using the Certificate ID.
- Implementation
- Not started
- Design
- Open for proposals suggest how it should read
A
suitescript api
1certificate.signXml({2 xmlString: /* string, required */,3 certId: /* string, required */,4 algorithm: /* string, required */,5 rootTag: /* string, required */,6 insertionTag: /* string, optional */7});
| Parameter | Type | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| options.xmlString | string | required | Input XML string |
| options.certId | string | required | Certificate ID |
| options.algorithm | string | required | The hash algorithm. Set this property using the certificate.HashAlg enum. |
| options.rootTag | string | required | Root tag of XML section to sign. |
| options.insertionTag | string | optional | Tag where the signature should be inserted. |
B
mynt syntax
No Mynt syntax yet.
Nothing in the language compiles to certificate.signXml(options) today. How should it read?
C
community proposals
Competing syntax for signXml, from GitHub Discussions. Select two or more to compare them side by side.
Loading proposals from GitHub…
D
suggest an alternative
Write the Mynt you wish you could write.
A good proposal shows the syntax, the SuiteScript it should become, and argues for it: why it is clearer, how it fits the rest of the language, what it makes harder.
- Clarity. Does it say what happens, without ceremony?
- Consistency. Does it read like
load,saveandRef[field]? - Expressiveness. Does it cover the cases people actually write?
- Honesty. Does it hide a NetSuite cost, such as governance, that a reader should see?