- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 10:36:44 -0400
- To: ext Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, Simon Hawkins <Simon.Hawkins@vodafone.com>
- Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
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: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/ 0028.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/ 0054.html In those threads you'll find the rationale for making C14N 1.1 mandatory. 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