W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 1999

RE: comments on 990806 Requirements Doc

From: Richard D. Brown <rdbrown@Globeset.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:10:43 -0500
To: "'Joseph M. Reagle Jr.'" <reagle@w3.org>, <dee3@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "'IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, "'John Boyer'" <jboyer@uwi.com>
Message-ID: <01af01bee983$76554580$0bc0010a@artemis.globeset.com>
Joseph,

Comments follow...

>  >3.1.3 & 3.3.1: Suggest replacing "negotiation" with
> "calculation".  I
> believe
>  >this refers to Diffie-Hellman and I think calculation is
> more accurate than
>  >negotiation.  Might even want to change 3.1.3 to be
> "...calculation of
> keying
>  >material such as Diffie-Hellman agreement."
>
> Done. Richard if you object, say so.
>

Agreed to some extent. Negotiation tends to imply some form of handshake
(multiple exchanges) during establishement of the key. However, I think that
"agreement" or "exchange" would be more accurate. The method that is used to
establish the key is not necessarily based upon mathematics.


>  >3.2.1: Suggest simply replacing "document" with "element"
> and dropping the
> boxed
>  >comment.
>
> Now reads, "An XML-signature must be a well-balanced XML
> region (as defined
> by XML-Fragment) that begins and ends with a signature
> element. [Charter]"
>

Why not simply "An XML-signature must be a well-formed XML element"

Richard D. Brown
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 1999 10:11:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:07 GMT