- From: Peter Saint-Andre <Peter.SaintAndre@webex.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:37:13 -0600
- To: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
This looks good to me. What is the import of having a normative reference to DRAFT-HOUSLEY-KW-PAD (which not yet approved)? I would assume there is a general W3C policy on downrefs of this kind, but I don't know what it is. Peter On 7/8/09 8:23 AM, "Frederick Hirsch" <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: > I made additional updates to XML Encryption 1.1 references based on > review by Cynthia: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2009Jul/0018.html > > I made all the changes as proposed, except for the following: > > (1) I removed the old XML Signature reference, retaining only > reference for Signature 1.1, naming it XML-DSIG. I assume it makes > more sense for XML Encryption 1.1 to reference Signature 1.1, let me > know if this is a problem. > > (2) Used http links for RFCs, not ftp links > > (3) Did not add RFC 5335 as update to MIME (list in addition), since > it is an experimental RFC. > > Please review the XML Encryption 1.1 references for correctness. I > also update explain.html and the redline: > > http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmlenc-core-11/Overview_diff.htm#sec-Refe > rences-Normative > > This should conclude ACTION-328 > > Thanks > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch > Nokia > > > >
Received on Friday, 10 July 2009 20:38:04 UTC