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

Re: Minutes 99-October-28

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:02:40 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 21:52 99/10/28 -0400, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote:
 >There is no place for DigestMethod parameters in the above structure
 >and two telecons ago people on the call liked having the parallelism of 
 >having SignatureMethod/SignatureValue and DigestMethod/DigestValue.

I'm beginning to doubt the usefullness of queing 2/3 weeks of
discussion/changes in our collective mind's without explicitly representing
in some way where we think we stand. Instead of updating our spec in this
time, it'd be at least to have that normative example and update that
accordingly till we rev the spec.

I assume you are referring to the discussion of [1], could you point me to
or state an example of the resulting syntax?

[1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/Minutes/991021a-tele.html

Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Friday, 29 October 1999 11:02:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:32 UTC