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

Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization

From: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:27:09 +0900
Message-Id: <200106200227.LAA23236@ns.trl.ibm.com>
To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org

In message "Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization"
    on 01/06/14, "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> writes:
> With respect to the issue of excluding ancestor context from the canonical 
> form of a signature[1], the WG should pursue option:
> 1. Specify the exclusive canonicalization as part of the non-normative (nor 
> required to implement) dsig-more specification [2].
> 2.Specify the exclusive canonicalization as part of the normative 
> xmldsig-core  as proposed in [3] (but with the URIs of [4]) as [REQUIRED, 
> RECOMMENDED, OPTIONAL]. (This option requires interoperable implementation 
> of this feature before xmldsig advances.)

I think we should do 2 as possible.  (Un)fortunately we don't
have Proposed Recommendation of dsig-core yet.

RECOMMENDED is suitable because we don't need it in all cases.

TAMURA Kent @ Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2001 22:27:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:35 UTC