- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 07:02:06 -0400
- To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <m21vd9lbgx.fsf@nwalsh.com>
James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> writes:
> yes, but the nice thing about xproc steps is we don't *have* to map
> them directly onto functions all the time ;) ... I think its natural
> place to put it though we need to ensure we get the version option
> defined as well for it.
FWIW, I've already implemented HMAC SHA1 as an extension to p:hash. Or
rather, Henry has, as I did little more than apply his patch. I
believe he needed it for some interaction with Amazon.
<p:hash algorithm="cx:hmac">
<p:with-param name="cx:accessKey" value="..."/>
</p:hash>
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Birds are taken with pipes that imitate
http://nwalsh.com/ | their own voices, and men with those
| sayings that are most agreeable to
| their own opinions.--Samuel Butler
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2010 11:02:43 UTC