- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 18:40:16 -0400
- To: david.solo@citicorp.com
- Cc: jboyer@uwi.com, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
At 17:45 99/09/08 -0400, david.solo@citicorp.com wrote: >> At 12:06 99/09/07 -0700, John Boyer wrote: >> >>Consensus. The reference from SignedInfo will just be a >> URI. This can then >> >> point to a manifest or package which can use Xlink/Xptr/Xpath as >> >>appropriate. This means you don't have to worry about >> Xptr in the core >> >>signature syntax. >> >Perhaps I misunderstood what that meant. Did you just mean >> that we could >> >punt the problem of having to make up a syntax for >> exclusion? Please >> >clarify. >> >> For the core syntax yes. > >I agree we need to clarify the types of references in the spec (on the todo >list). I'm sorry, are you saying exlusion/XPtr is in the core syntax, or not? _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org XML-Signature Co-Chair http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 1999 18:41:33 UTC