W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > August 2011

Re: media type registration (Re: Draft minutes from 16 August 2011)

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:32:39 +0200
Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-Id: <A5A463C8-61D9-486E-B8F6-B6DB86DFF6BD@w3.org>
To: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
On 2011-08-16, at 17:36 +0200, <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote:

> Thomas, all
> 
> I think it is a very confusing policy to embed a registration document within another document as the references for the two become intermixed and formatting becomes that of the enclosing document etc
> 
> That said, the XML Encryption 1.1 media type section contains many references that are now listed in the references of the enclosing document. I think we should keep it that way to simplify maintenance of references (also that is where you'd expect to find document references as a reader).
> 

It's fine with me to keep the registration's references in the enclosing document.  I can fix this effect when the registration request gets submitted.

> There are also a number of references to XML Encryption 1.1, the enclosing document.
> 
> Putting each inline and attempting to maintain it would be a mistake.

> Thus I think we should go with another approach mentioned on the call today, and change each reference in this section to XML Encryption 1.1 to be the text
> "XMLENC-CORE1 (this document)" instead of [XMLENC-CORE1]. This should be clear within the context of the enclosing document and similar to the reference that would be used in a separate media type submission request. No corresponding reference will be included in the list of references.

No strong opinion either way on my side  this is the level of detail where I'd be happy to make the decision based on whatever is less work.
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2011 16:32:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 16 August 2011 16:32:48 GMT