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

Re: XML decryption transform number 13

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:01:02 -0400
To: "Takeshi Imamura" <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>, merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>, Aleksey Sanin <aleksey@aleksey.com>, Jiandong Guo <jguo@phaos.com>
Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020617200102.D37481F4@policy.w3.org>


This is a difficult issue to mediate. Ultimately, whether this level of 
abstract specification is acceptable is if other implementors are able to 
implement the algorithm in an interoperable way. Aleksey and Jiandong, how 
do you feel. Do you think the text as described in [1] is adequate?

On Sunday 16 June 2002 11:45 pm, Takeshi Imamura wrote:
> I understand what Joseph and you intend, but I don't think that it is so
> easy to describe.  That is because the XPath data model does not suppose
> that any nodes are copied or imported from another document.  What does
> "copy these nodes into another document, duplicating the structure where
> possible" mean formally?  How can it be broken down using the XPath
> vocabularies?  If we define our vocabularies for describing it, it would
> be OK.  However, I'm not sure whether that is worth doing, considering
> efforts for it.
>
> >Are you suggesting that decrypt-and-replace is not possible? If
> >so, why are you not asking that the entire concept be removed
> >from the specification?
>
> No.  It is possible.  I'm not concerned about its possibility but its
> description.

Takeshi, could you then indicate which specific text you would like to see 
in place of my text in 4.3.2?

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Drafts/xmlenc-core/#sec-Decrypt-Replace-Imp
Received on Monday, 17 June 2002 16:01:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:04 UTC