W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 2000

Omission of the XML Version in C14N

From: <muraw3c@attglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:08:36 -0400 (EDT)
To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
cc: w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
Message-Id: <20000801000656Q.muraw3c@attglobal.net>
The last call perior for the new C14N WD is over.  I should have
raised one issue.

Canonicalized documents do not contain XML declarations.  
Is this OK?

First, XML should allow some of the newly-introducedcharacters of
Unicode 3.0 as name characters.  If we introduce them in V1.1 of XML,
validity (e.g., NMTOKEN) of an XML document will be dependent on the
XML version.

Second, Unicode character properties may vary, and thus the same
Unicode-aware regular expression of XML Schema Part 2 may behave
differently for different versions of XML.

Even if the XML version info is absent from APIs such as SAX and DOM, 
should we always generate <?xml version="1.0"?>?

Cheers,

IBM Tokyo Research Lab &
International University of Japan, Research Institute

MURATA Makoto  (FAMILY Given)

Speaking for himself only.
Received on Tuesday, 1 August 2000 17:27:03 GMT

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