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

Re: AW: AW: Mixed Content Model for Transform?

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 09:52:40 -0400
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000901095130.00b71900@rpcp.mit.edu>
To: "Gregor Karlinger" <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com>, Ed Simon <ed.simon@entrust.com>
My preference is for element only as well for Transforms. Does anyone oppose 
this. Ed/John, is the mixed content for Transforms even relevant to the 
types of transforms we'd expect people to write now?


At 15:40 9/1/2000 +0200, Gregor Karlinger wrote:
> > At 08:29 9/1/2000 +0200, Gregor Karlinger wrote:
> > >Yes, I think it would be fine to have the same structure for all kind of
> > >algorithms.
> >
> > But are you arguing for consistency or for mixed? I could make them all
> > element only.
>
>I am arguing mainly for consistency. I personally would feel better with
>element only; if somebody wants to have mixed content, he can define a
>parameter element which allows this mixed content.



_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Friday, 1 September 2000 09:52:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:11 GMT