- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 17:39:15 -0400
- To: "Takeshi Imamura" <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Frederick J. Hirsch" <hirsch@zolera.com>, <xml-encryption@w3.org>
At 03:18 5/30/2001, Takeshi Imamura wrote: > >Is the rationale that the first form makes for easier processing since the >types > >are clearly distinguished via elements at the expense of slightly more >verbose > >XML? I gather the first form is also more extensible. > >I believe so. > >By the way, in your example, you specify C14N as a transform, but C14N is >not reversible and cannot be specified. And I'd like to make sure that >transforms specified in a transform sequence are those applied before >decrypting. I'm a little confused. The spec says, "it is the reverse transforms that are applied before decrypting and it is the reverse transforms that are specified in the CipherData element." which your text seems to disagree with, but your example below: ><CipherReference URI="some-URI"> > <ds:Transforms> > <ds:Transform Algorithm="decode"/> > <ds:Transform Algorithm="decompress"/> > </ds:Transforms> ></CipherReference> agrees with!? Are the transforms specified as they should be done after decryption, or as they were done before encryption? -- 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, 4 June 2001 17:39:32 UTC