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

Re: Canonical MicroXML

From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:59:38 +0100
Message-ID: <CAA0AChUaN27+POhAmSqpQb_K59W8WNBXBvB_-Sei5xq5nqrKug@mail.gmail.com>
To: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
'single' ?
----
Stephen D Green



On 2 October 2012 14:37, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net> wrote:

> 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 14:00:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 October 2012 14:00:31 GMT