W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-encryption@w3.org > November 2000

Re: Requirements and Goals for the Design of an 'XML Encryption Standard'

From: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:00:51 +0100
To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>, Gerald Huck <huck@darmstadt.gmd.de>
Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org
Message-ID: <3533443075.974196051@clouseau>
Hi, Joseph

--On Donnerstag, 9. November 2000 18:18 -0500 "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." 
<reagle@w3.org> wrote:

>> R3.4.1                XES MUST define a uniform naming scheme for
>> serialization/transformation/encryption algorithms
> What does this mean? I don't _think_ we've identified a desire to create
> a transformation process like that in Signature. Also what do you mean by
> transformations?

Wouldn't transforms make sense? At the workshop, there was the diecussion 
about c14n and compression, which read (if I understood it right):

* If you want to c14n you instances before encryption - do so!
* If you want to compress you instances before encryption - do so!

but how do we indicate what we did if we don't have a list of 
transformations? This would make the "compression or not" discussion 
obsolete, because the application could choose.

Best regards,

Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2000 04:12:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:59 UTC