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

Re: Editorial problem in Section 4.2 of digital signature spec

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:29:27 -0400
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010716130526.00b71938@localhost>
To: "Tom Gindin" <tgindin@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, dee3@torque.pothole.com, dsolo@alum.mit.edu, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org 
At 23:58 7/15/2001, Tom Gindin wrote:
>     This may not be perfectly stated, but its intent is not that obscure.
>A better way of putting it might be: "While we specify two SignatureMethod
>algorithms, one mandatory and one optional to implement, user specified
>algorithms may be used as SignatureMethod algorithms instead."

http://www.w3.org/Signature/Drafts/xmldsig-core/Overview.html
$Revision: 1.94 $ on $Date: 2001/07/16 17:28:08 $
/+While we identify two SignatureMethod algorithms, one mandatory and one 
optional to implement, user specified algorithms may be used as well.+/

--
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 Monday, 16 July 2001 13:29:33 GMT

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