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

Re: [urgent] XML Signature 2.0 namespace?

From: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:18:11 -0400
Cc: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, Pratik Datta <pratik.datta@oracle.com>, XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BE57FBC3-DE37-4FD0-933B-EF3432A9A138@nokia.com>
To: ext Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
instead of experimental why not xmldsig2, so we don't have to change  
it later. experimental is not very meaningful

e.g.

  http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/xmldsig2#

Thanks for reviewing this carefully.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Oct 21, 2009, at 5:10 PM, ext Thomas Roessler wrote:

> I'm working on the XML Signature 2.0 draft publication right now
> (publication date is tomorrow), and see that we're using the following
> namespaces in the XML Signature 2.0 draft:
>    http://www.w3.org/2010/xmlsec/xmldsig2
>    http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/2010/xmlsec/xmldsig2
> Also, we seem to be using this URI to identify xml-c14n2:
>   http://www.w3.org/2010/xmlsec/xml-c14n20
>
> The namespaces for Signature 2.0 are entirely too long.  For C14N2,
> I'd like to choose something that (a) matches the shortname, and (b)
> isn't yet the final identifier.
>
> Unless I hear strong objections, I'll change these namespaces and
> identifiers as follows...
>
> Algorithm identifier for the current version of c14n2 to dated URI of
> spec (to be changed later):
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-xml-c14n2-20091022/
> Namespace for XML dsig2:
>   http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/experimental#
>
> (The last namespace is one that we've previously used as an
> experimental namespace.)
>
> If you want something else, let me know ASAP.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 21 October 2009 21:18:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:44:00 GMT