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

Re: Draft for 2.0 specs

From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:31:20 -0400
Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-Id: <81CB620A-85A6-4E7B-AE81-AEEB361AA34B@nokia.com>
To: "ext pratik.datta@oracle.com" <pratik.datta@oracle.com>
I believe xmlspec is a much better choice than html since it  
eliminates much of the manual maintenance work.

I also agree on approach for transforms, refer back to 1.1


regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Jun 18, 2009, at 1:18 PM, ext pratik.datta@oracle.com wrote:

> I am figuring out the format for writing the initial draft of the  
> 2.0 specs.
>
> As we had discussed in F2F, the whole 2.0 transform mechanism will
> plugin as a new transform. So all the 1.x transforms will still be
> supported.  But I am thinking of producing a new XML Signature 2.0
> draft, which only includes this new transform, and not include any of
> the 1.x transforms, rather the 2.0 draft will just point to relevant
> sections of 1.x. This way if we decide to update any of the transforms
> for 1.1, we don't have to change in two places.
>
> I will also be writing up a draft of XML Canonicalization 2.0.  I am
> planning to use xmlspec format for both these drafts.
>
> Pratik
>
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2009 17:32:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:58 GMT