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

Re: XML decryption transform number 13

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 12:00:52 -0400
To: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>, "John Boyer" <JBoyer@pureedge.com>
Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020606160052.2E5DB859F5@aeon.w3.org>

I've taken a "first stab" at representing the decrypt-and-replace, 
wrapping, and recommendations on xmlns="" (resulting from discussion in 
xmldsig on exc-c14n [1]) into the core spec [2]. What do folks think?

[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2002AprJun/0292.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Drafts/xmlenc-core/Overview#new-stuff
$Revision: 1.201 $ (Hey, we've now had 200 revisions of the core spec! 
<smile/>)


On Monday 03 June 2002 09:00 pm, merlin wrote:
> >>     * If its Type is &xenc;(Content|Element) then decrypt
> >>       it, wrap it in the parsing context of the EncryptedData
> >>       element, parse this and trim it. (Aside: I think that
> >>       this definition of the processing of these Types
> >>       should be in the xmlenc spec. We could then allow
> >>       decrypt-and-replace mode to operate uniformly on any
> >>       Type whose "processing" result is a node set. I am not
> >>       asking for wrap/parse/trim to be their specification,
> >>       just that the "result" of processing these types is
> >>       defined to be a node set, a non-normative implementation
> >>       of which is wrap/parse/trim.)
> >
> >This sounds like a good idea.
>
> How should I process your approbation? That this might actually
> be a useful change to the xmlenc spec, or that it would just
> be an interesting approach.
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2002 12:01:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:03 UTC