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

Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft

From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:48:03 +0100
To: vdv@dyomedea.com
Cc: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, lde008@dma.isg.mot.com
Message-Id: <20010712124803.8AD9443BCB@yog-sothoth.ie.baltimore.com>

Hi Eric,

>I find the idea of UnsuppressedNamespacePrefixList [1] very interesting
>and I wonder if a "DoNotRewriteNamespacePrefixList" that would specify
>which namespaces prefixes cannot be rewritten (or a
>"MayBeRewrittenNamespacePrefixList" that would specify which of them can
>be rewritten) couldn't solve the issue of prefix rewriting in a very
>consensual way.

Does rewriting anything other than all prefixes actually provide
any benefit?

I understand that normalizing namespace prefixes may be useful to
applications that do not preserve this information. However, if
we are not to normalize certain prefixes then that implies that
the relevant application will also preserve those prefixes, which
implies that it could preserve all prefixes?

I presume that you have a use in mind; can you elaborate?


Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct,  special,  indirect 
or consequential  damages  arising  from  alteration of  the contents of this
message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on.

In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to
promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or
appearance at trade shows and conferences.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 08:48:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:36 UTC