W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-encryption@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Publications of the Second xenc Candidate Recs

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:50:56 -0400
To: "Takeshi Imamura" <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>, Merlin Hughes <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org
Message-Id: <200208271450.56922.reagle@w3.org>

[ Result:
  http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Drafts/xmlenc-decrypt
  $Revision: 1.57 $ on $Date: 2002/08/27 18:49:31 $ GMT
]

On Monday 26 August 2002 07:35 am, Takeshi Imamura wrote:
> I have a few editorial comments on the Decryption Transform spec.  Hope
> these help.

Thanks!

> 1. In Step 2 of decryptXML() in Section 3.1, "section 4.3.1" and "section
> 4.3.2" would be "section 3.4.1" and "section 3.4.2", respectively.  Also,
> itemization looks awkward.  The first item is missing.

Fixed in editors' copy.

> 2. In Step 3 of decryptNodeSet() in Section 3.1, a step saying that Y is
> replaced with Y U {Od} is missing between Steps 1 and 2.

You're right, but I'm not sure that's enough given this is a recursive 
function. I've also prepended the following to the last step, "If Od 
contains xenc:EncryptedData that are not in E." Is that correct?

> 3. In execution steps of the transform in Section 3.3, each example has
> an item number, which would not be necessary.

Are you saying they should be an unordered bulleted list, or no list at all? 
(Having them be numbered isn't required and does look a little awkward, but 
it can still be useful when we talk about the particular steps.) However, I 
did remove the numbered bullets associated with the output of the steps, 
and it looks much better.

> 4. In Section 3.4.4, a KeyInfo structure referenced by a RetrievalMethod
> element could be included in the second and third examples.  Also, a
> decrypted document could be added to the end.  So, examples would be as
> follows:

You're example isn't intended to be plug-and-play is it? For instance, your 
new [a*] example has no mention of <Part number="1">, but this is still in 
[c*], which you didn't give a replacement for? While we could demonstrate 
that dsig:RetrievalMethod could be used, I'm not sure we need to 
demonstrate that here; and I'm not sure what you mean by "decrypted 
document could be added to the end." So given my confusion I won't 
introduce any changes to the example, though if you and Merlin want to give 
me the html to replace it, I'll happily do so!
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2002 14:51:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:21 GMT