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

RE: To be resolved: is ISSUE-57 [name of element in end tag /] stillimportant?

From: Edgar, Gerald <gerald.edgar@boeing.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 16:31:48 -0700
Message-ID: <DC298B2E18C4C6468BA017B020D393E2089B52D2@XCH-NW-3V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
To: "Pratik Datta" <pratik.datta@oracle.com>
Cc: "XMLSec WG Public List" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Pratik -
 
Does this mean we can close ISSUE-57?
 

Gerald Edgar, CISSP 
Enterprise Architecture & Information Security 

Cell: 425-503-3912 

 

________________________________

From: Pratik Datta [mailto:pratik.datta@oracle.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 11:49 AM
To: Edgar, Gerald
Cc: XMLSec WG Public List
Subject: Re: To be resolved: is ISSUE-57 [name of element in end tag /]
stillimportant?


I added this as a proposal in the Transform document
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-xmldsig-simplify-20090226/#canonicalization
-element

See Section 4.4, bullet 4 about at the "serialization" attribute


serialization whether to output in regular XML format, or some kind of
compact XML format. A compact XML would result in fewer bytes going to
the digestor which would speed it up. EXI is one such format. Another
suggested format is to remove the tag name from the closing tag. i.e.
instead of <foo>bar</foo> use <foo>bar</>

Pratik

Edgar, Gerald wrote: 

	Is ISSUE-57 still important? 
	
	It is titled: "c14n end tags
	"eliminate the need of the name of the element in end tag / make
it
	optional"
	http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/57
	
	 This is not addressed in C14N
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-c14n11/) or XML
	Signature Syntax and Processing Version 1.1 work
	(http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-xmldsig-core1-20090226/)  
	
	There is only one e-mail on this
	
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2008Aug/0019.html
	
	
	Gerald Edgar, CISSP
	Boeing
	
	  
Received on Monday, 9 March 2009 23:32:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:57 GMT