- From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 17:23:26 +0100
- To: reagle@w3.org
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
r/reagle@w3.org/2002.06.05/11:25:18 >On Wednesday 05 June 2002 09:53 am, merlin wrote: >> Perfect. > >Ok, so aside from typos and bits of cruft I've introduced in editing >(please let me know) I think we've greatly improved upon the specification >of the processing. > >http://www.w3.org/Signature/Drafts/xml-exc-c14n > $Revision: 1.72 $ Agreed, things are much more clear. §3, 4.3.3, "...the nearest output ancestor of its parent element that visibly utilizes the namespace prefix has a namespace node in the node-set with the a different namespace prefix and value as N." This doesnt't quite capture it. Either: "...the nearest output ancestor of its parent element that visibly utilizes the namespace prefix does not have a namespace node in the node-set with the same prefix and value as N." Or: "...the nearest output ancestor of its parent element that visibly utilizes the namespace prefix has a namespace node in the node-set with the same prefix and a different value than N, or has no namespace node in the node set with the same prefix as N." Merlin >1. I tweaked step 3 in the specification to be positive (rules for >rendering instead of ignoring so as to be consistent wi th everything else.) >2. I gave the implementation its own little section: "3.1 Constrained >Implementation (non-normative)" >3. In the implementation I broke out the creation of ns_rendered as its own >(first) step. >4. The last step is now clear with respect to ns_rendered. > >> >http://www.w3.org/Signature/2002/02/01-exc-c14n-interop.html >> >new revision: 1.22 >> >> BTW, the interop report says Excl[ui]sve. > >Fixed. >
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2002 12:24:03 UTC