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

RE: Minutes from Today's Call Please Review/Correct

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:42:16 -0400
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990820144216.0095da90@localhost>
To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@uwi.com>
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 11:15 99.08.20 -0700, John Boyer wrote:
 >Although putting an exclusion list in the canonicalizer element is an
 >interesting idea, it is certainly not the only place to put it.  I sent a
 >write-up to Joseph with several alternatives, which he said would soon be
 >added as a comment to requirement 3.1.3.


Will be published today, the following links to both of your emails.
 

        Comment: A related requirement under consideration is that of being
able to 
        indicate those portions of a document one signs via exclusion of
those portions 
        one does not wish to sign. This allows one to create signatures that
have 
        document closure, retain ancestor information when necessary, and
retain        
        element order of non-continuous regions that must be signed.We look
appreciate 
        feedback on options of meeting this requirement including a special
<c14n:exclude>
        element, an exclude list accompanying the resource locator, a change
in the 
        fragment or XPointer specification that would yield this
functionality. See 
        List(Boyer(1,2)) for further discussion of this issue.

        [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 Friday, 20 August 1999 14:42:26 GMT

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