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

Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:54:45 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 07:58 7/12/2001, merlin wrote:
>The encoding (and, incidentally, your algorithm URI) belongs in &more;

If I understand you, I don't agree with this. This specification should 
define its own identifier. Why would it exist in &more;?

Regardless, I'm of where it's specified, I believe the list needs to be 
specfied in one of the following ways:
        <Transform Algorithm="&exc-c14n">foo,bar</Transform>
Unless we decide it's encoded as part of the identifier:
         <Transform Algorithm="&exc-c14n?unsupressed=foo,bar">

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 Thursday, 12 July 2001 18:54:49 UTC

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