- From: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:44:24 -0500
- To: ext Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, ext Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>, "'XMLSec WG Public List'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
How about this Proposal: Replace "Use of the MgmtData element is deprecated." with "Support of the MgmtData element in implementations is optional. The element SHOULD NOT be used. Interoperable use of MgmtData is not defined - interoperable alternatives are described in the next section. " regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Dec 14, 2009, at 10:13 AM, ext Sean Mullan wrote: > This is fine with me, though I think an additional sentence explaining > why it should no longer be used would be useful. > > --Sean > > Frederick Hirsch wrote: >> Thomas and I talked about this, how about replacing "Use of the >> MgmtData >> element is deprecated." with "Support of the MgmtData element in >> implementations is optional. The element SHOULD NOT be used." >> >> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-MgmtData >> >> >> regards, Frederick >> >> Frederick Hirsch >> Nokia >> >> >> >> On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) >> wrote: >> >>> I believe it means, not to be used. I could not find a definition in >>> the W3 process document. >>> >>> regards, Frederick >>> >>> Frederick Hirsch >>> Nokia >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:00 PM, ext Scott Cantor wrote: >>> >>>> Sean Mullan wrote on 2009-12-08: >>>>> I think we should define what the term "deprecated" means. How >>>>> should >>>>> implementations treat MgmtData? Should they ignore it, or treat it >>>>> as an >>>>> error? Or is it optional for implementations to support it? If not >>>>> clear, this could be interpreted by implementations differently. >>>> >>>> As a suggestion, I believe that MgmtData is OPTIONAL to sup
Received on Monday, 14 December 2009 15:45:42 UTC