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

Comments on Canonical XML

From: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:12:18 +0900
Message-Id: <200009280812.RAA10090@ns.trl.ibm.com>
To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Members of my group read the latest Canonical XML [1] and the
latest XML Signature [2].  The following are comments on [1]
from members.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000907
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xmldsig-core-20000918/

2.3 Processing Model
o Element Nodes
  Please add a note that resultant octets may not be well-formed XML.

o Namespace Nodes, the first sentence
  "the node's parent element" is confusing.  Some members
misunderstood "the node's parent element" was "the parent
element of the element that is owner of the namepace node".
They think attribute nodes and namespace nodes have no *parent*
element, but have the *owner* element.

3 Examples of XML Canonicalization
o All examples
  We could not see whether LF exists or not in each line.  Write
visible LFs in examples like <em><font color=red>LF</font></em>,
please.

3.6 UTF-8 Encoding
  "#xC2#xA9" is confusing.  Change font or color of this.  We
want hexadecimal dumps of the Input Document and the Canonical
Form.

4.6 Superfluous Namespace Declarations
  This section does not describe that xmlns:xml="..." nodes are
omitted.

-- 
TAMURA Kent @ Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2000 04:12:53 GMT

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