Re: DigSig feedback

On May 5, 2010, at 9:40 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:

> Our only other comment on the specification is related to the new  
> requirement for the validator to support C14N11:
> "A validator  MUST support [C14N11] to process a ds:Reference that  
> specifies [C14N11] as a canonicalization method."
> If we remember the previous discussions, there was a move to [XML- 
> exc-C14N] because of concerns over the level of support for  
> [C14N11]. Making support for this mandatory may cause us some  
> issues in the short term. Can you explain why this requirement has  
> been added?

The head of the discussion threads related to the group's decision to  
move from C14N 1.0 to 1.1 are: 

In those threads you'll find the rationale for making C14N 1.1  

In practice, I suspect interoperable implementations will need to  
support both C14N 1.0 and 1.1 (e.g. to assure being able to handle  
signed widgets based on the July-2009 Candidate and C14N 1.0).

-Art Barstow

Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2010 14:37:21 UTC