W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > December 2009

RE: Review of XML Encryption / EXI integration (ACTION-493)

From: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:06:21 -0500
To: "'Thomas Roessler'" <tlr@w3.org>
Cc: "'XMLSec WG Public List'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>, "'Carine Bournez'" <carine@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009001ca7cf8$e7d26760$b7773620$@2@osu.edu>
Thomas Roessler wrote on 2009-12-14:
> I'd basically aim to make clear that the base64 encoding is mandated
> normatively elsewhere (i.e., in the schema).  That can be done by turning
it
> into a parenthesis; I do take your point that it needs to be mentioned
here.

There are a number of base64Binary types in the schemas, but I'm not aware
of any other cases in which the phrasing has been to imply that the schema
is what dictates the encoding. E.g. the various KeyInfo types.

I would say rather that the encoding is mandated by the spec, and the schema
where possible reflects that.

-- Scott
Received on Monday, 14 December 2009 20:07:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 14 December 2009 20:07:08 GMT