- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:17:49 -0500
- To: "Takeshi Imamura" <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>
- Cc: <hirsch@zolera.com>, <xml-encryption@w3.org>, "Hiroshi Maruyama" <MARUYAMA@jp.ibm.com>
[ Result: http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Drafts/xmlenc-decrypt $Revision: 1.13 $ on $Date: 2001/11/15 22:14:59 $ GMT by $Author: reagle $ ] I think we're good for publication except for the two small questions (about "e" and "entity") I have about the parsing context. o Prefix and namespace name of each namespace that is in scope for e, the first element node in X. [is this e different than that in decryptIncludedNodes? -JR] o Name and value of each entity [is this the formal definion of entity from xml1.0 or something else -JR] that is effective for the XML document causing X. On Friday 02 November 2001 12:18, Takeshi Imamura wrote: > You missed Frederick's tweak about XPointer. Fixed. > Also I think that the third item in Section 2.1.2 is not a restriction > but just a note for the function decrypt(). So it should be moved to the > definition of the function. Ok. > OK, I try revising the description of the function "noDecryptNodes" as > follows: Ok. -- 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 Thursday, 15 November 2001 17:17:53 UTC