- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:00:30 -0400
- To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@uwi.com>
- Cc: <dee3@us.ibm.com>, "Richard D. Brown" <rdbrown@Globeset.com>, "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 13:30 99/08/17 -0700, John Boyer wrote: >[Comments to an email from Don, that hasn't yet made it to the list.] > >At 13:21 99/08/17 -0400, dee3@us.ibm.com wrote: > >2.2: Suggest changing "The manifest includes..." to "The manifest must > >support..." so as to permit other types of manifest. > >Manifests that don't use URIs? If so, what would be the example? > ><John> For example, having the signature directly sign the data by >enveloping the data inside of the manifest. </John> Ok, I've included to Don's suggest text. The resulting document is at [1] and will be officially published tomorrow. Then I'll update the ietf-draft and push this out to W3C chairs and XML plenary and start twisting arms to get commitments for review once we have a draft we are fairly comfortable with. [1] http://www.w3.org/1999/08/xmldsig-requirements-990820.html _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org XML-Signature Co-Chair http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 19 August 1999 15:00:40 UTC