Re: [widgets] W3C Widgets Digital Signatures implementer feedback

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Marcos Caceres <> wrote:
> Dear Web Apps WG,
> Opera would like to provide some feedback based on our implementation
> experience of the Widgets Digsig specification.
> Generally, we found that the specification is implementable but have
> significant concerns about the requirement on XML Canonicalization 1.1.
> Basically, we found that in practice you don't need it for this version of
> the spec as widget signatures do not make use of the things Canonicalization
> 1.1 addresses.
> We would like to propose the specification be changed to use XML
> Canonicalization 1.0 throughout the specification.

To be clear, we mean:

XML Canonicalization 1.0 (omits comments):

> If other implementers have found the same thing (i.e., they don't require
> Canonicalization 1.1), then please lets start a discussion about what
> changes need to be made to the specification and the potential impact of
> using Canonicalization 1.0 exclusively throughout.
> If we get rapid agreement, then we can move to updating the spec, changing
> the test cases, and republishing as a new LC ASAP.
> Kind regards,
> Marcos

Marcos Caceres
Opera Software ASA,

Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 16:36:20 UTC