W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > March 2010

RE: algorithm URIs

From: Pratik Datta <PRATIK.DATTA@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 08:25:06 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <0e3d0189-293c-46d4-9e95-a63a27bfe061@default>
To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Cc: "public-xmlsec@w3.org Public List" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
We are ready to coin a URI.
I am ok with what you proposed i.e. "http://www.w3.org/2010/xml-c14n2"

What do you think of the current new Transform model URI
"http://www.w3.org/2010/xmlsec/xmldsig2#newTransformModel"


Pratik

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Roessler [mailto:tlr@w3.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 8:00 AM
To: Pratik Datta
Cc: Thomas Roessler; public-xmlsec@w3.org Public List
Subject: algorithm URIs

Pratik,

I didn't want us to descend into bikeshedding the URIs on the call. ;-)

I'd prefer to avoid /2010/xmlsec as a part of the namespace, and keep those URIs short.  Therefore, I suggest that -- if we think we're ready to coin a URI for C14N 2.0 -- that should be /2010/xml-c14n2.  If we don't think we're ready yet to coin a URI, we should use /2008/xmlsec/experimental#c14n2 or something like that; we had allocated /2008/xmlsec/experimental for experimental identifiers.  See the list of namespaces here:
	http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/namespaces.html

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,
--
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2010 16:27:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 March 2010 16:27:16 GMT