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

Re: XML decryption transform number 13

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 12:58:40 -0400
To: Ari Kermaier <arik@phaos.com>, "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: <20020618165841.3A65D525@policy.w3.org>

On Tuesday 18 June 2002 11:39 am, Ari Kermaier wrote:
> Frankly, I'm not sure how the text in [1] actually helps implementors.

I'd agree, it doesn't help an implementor with respect to how to implement 
it. That's supposed to be a feature, though the result should be 
interoperable.

> What does "copying" nodes from node-sets X and Y to node-set Z mean --
> aren't X's and Y's nodes in different underlying documents? 

Yes. Create a node as defined in [a] akin to that in the existing document 
(unless decrypted).

[a] http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#data-model

> It seems that
> what we're trying to do is help implementors fix up the resulting XML
> document, using language that remains consistent with the XPath data
> model. This may be a futile effort.

It is a difficult task, but our critical requirement is to be able to 
"decrypt-and-replace". If we can specify it abstractly and still have 
interoperable results: good.

What would you like to see Ari? Do you feel the present Candidate RECs are 
approriate and we should add necessary warning/limitations text? Do you 
have more specific text in mind?
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2002 12:58:41 UTC

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