W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: XML Signatures and binary files

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:42:04 -0400
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010518104028.024a5000@localhost>
To: "johnmessing" <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
Cc: "merlin" <merlin@baltimore.ie>, "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, "Dournaee, Blake" <bdournaee@rsasecurity.com>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org> 
At 07:13 5/18/2001 -0700, johnmessing wrote:
>I would make mime-type optional.

They are both optional [1]. The question is can we find a compelling 
reasoning for maintaining both of them, and if so, how do they interact?

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/CR-xmldsig-core-20010419/#sec-Object
    <element name="Object" type="ds:ObjectType"/>
    <complexType name="ObjectType" mixed="true">
      <sequence minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
        <any namespace="##any" processContents="lax"/>
      </sequence>
      <attribute name="Id" type="ID" use="optional"/>
      <attribute name="MimeType" type="string" use="optional"/>
      <attribute name="Encoding" type="anyURI" use="optional"/>
    </complexType>


__
Joseph Reagle Jr.                 http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/Signature
W3C XML Encryption Chair          http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 10:42:24 GMT

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