W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-microxml@w3.org > October 2012

Re: Canonical MicroXML

From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 07:37:53 -0600
Message-ID: <CAPJCua2f4-vEHB+Og--wJnywRpuaok6TxhYgNuDrE-u2QhWY1w@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-microxml@w3.org
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Stephen D Green
<stephengreenubl@gmail.com>wrote:

> Why / in what sense "unique"? I think I know what is meant
> but it could be taken the wrong way. Clearly two documents
> can have identical canonical versions and therefore neither
> be 'unique'.
>

But each c14n would be unique in respect to a particular transform.
 James's wording is clearly talking about the range, not the domain.  In
other words the output of a c14n transform is unique even though its inputs
need not be.  I'm not sure it would be clearer to use wording to the effect
that it's a many to one transform.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                       http://uche.ogbuji.net
Founding Partner, Zepheira        http://zepheira.com
http://wearekin.org
http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
http://copia.ogbuji.net
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
http://twitter.com/uogbuji
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 13:38:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 October 2012 13:38:21 GMT