RE: Canonical XML comment (example 3.6)

Hi Gregor,

Yes, you are right.  The input document is not well-formed unless the
version number is added.  Once added, the output is correct.  Will fix.

Thanks,
John Boyer
Development Team Leader,
Distributed Processing and XML
PureEdge Solutions Inc.
Creating Binding E-Commerce
v: 250-479-8334, ext. 143  f: 250-479-3772
1-888-517-2675   http://www.PureEdge.com <http://www.pureedge.com/>



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org
[mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Gregor Karlinger
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 7:17 AM
To: XMLSigWG; John Boyer
Subject: Canonical XML comment (example 3.6)


Hi John,

In example 3.6 (UTF-8 Encoding) you forgot to include the
required version info into the XML declaration. So the input
document should be

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<doc>&#169;</doc>

instead of

<?xml encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<doc>&#169;</doc>

Regards, Gregor
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gregor Karlinger
mailto://gregor.karlinger@iaik.at
http://www.iaik.at
Phone +43 316 873 5541
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications
Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------