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

Re: ISSUE-183 status and proposed resolution

From: Ed Simon <edsimon@xmlsec.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:08:43 -0400
To: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com
Cc: public-xmlsec@w3.org
Message-ID: <1284473323.1547.4.camel@XMLSEC-BIZ.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>
Though I maintain that constraining 2.0 canonicalization for SignedInfo
could be useful in specific (e.g. Magic-like Signatures), I am fine with
closing this Issue.

Ed


On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 20:52 +0200, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com wrote:
> ISSUE-183 Constrain 2.0 SignedInfo canonicalization choice for 2.0 model? [1]
> 
> I think this issue evolved since it was first noted. Initially it was part of Ed's proposal,  "XML Signature Strawman Proposal" (slide 14 onwards), Ed Simon, 2007 November: http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/f2f-2007-11-08/XML-Signature-Proposal-2.pdf
> 
> Subsequently we decided not to change the structure of XML Signature schema significantly in order to maintain backward compatibility (the 2.0 mode approach).
> 
> This left the issue as a question of whether in 2.0 we should constrain the canonicalization method choice for SignedInfo, and I believe we decided not to do so.
> 
> Proposal:  close this issue with no change required
> 
> regards, Frederick
> 
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/183
> 
> This should compete ACTION-653
> 
> 
> 

-- 
========================================
Ed Simon, XMLsec Inc.
613-726-9645
edsimon@xmlsec.com 
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 14:09:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 14 September 2010 14:09:17 GMT