Exclusive C14N

• From: Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>
• Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:10:04 -0500
• To: XMLSec WG <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
• Message-id: <49B19F3C.3070808@sun.com>

I vaguely recall discussing this before, but is there a good reason why 
exclusive C14N is recommended and not required in the XML Signature 1.1 draft?

--Sean

Received on Friday, 6 March 2009 22:10:42 UTC