W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: Canonical XML revision

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 08:47:39 -0500
To: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: jose.kahan@w3.org, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-Id: <200512170847.39747.reagle@mit.edu>

On Thursday 15 December 2005 13:46, John Boyer wrote:
> 3) The W3C community seems to be interested in less rigor, not more.
> The thing that's really busted, IMO, is the volatility of namespaces, 

I have to agree with John on this point. Yet, unfortunately, this is the 
world that we live in and unless we can convince the world not to be 
changing the meaning of documents after the fact, we will continue living 
in. (XML is guilty, but for that matter, so is Unicode!) However, since our 
concern is security, I would hope we not contribute to the trend. Granted, 
we have had to make compromises, even issue erratum for mistakes, but when 
a change is purposeful and explicit like this (rather than a mistake or 
oversight on our part), I would argue for a new algorithm. John, granted 
that it is a messy world, what is the argument against the new algorithm?
Received on Saturday, 17 December 2005 13:47:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:40 UTC