W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > June 2008


From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:16:28 +0200
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0806192316y5600b33dg67827ef61b6ca116@mail.gmail.com>
To: "XProc WG" <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

15:15:13 [Norm]Topic: C14N support15:15:19 [Norm]Norm attempt to summarize
the minutes15:17:45 [Norm]Norm: For V1.0, let's leave it up to implementors
to use an implementation-defined method.15:19:38 [Norm]Alex: But if someone
wanted to do it, they'd need to use extension attributes15:19:50 [Norm]Some
discussion about whether or not extension attributes are allowed on
p:serialization. They are.15:20:07 [Norm]Alex: I'm ok with this story.15:20:17
[Norm]Proposal: Do nothing for this in V1.015:20:39 [Norm]Norm observes that
Mohamed isn't here, but hopefull that'll be ok.15:20:46 [Norm]Accepted.]]I'm
ok with that as long as there is an exemple in the spec of such extension
for C14N !

If I undertstand correctly

something like

<p:serialization method="myext:c14n" myext:keep-comments="false"
xmlns:myext="http://my.company.com/extension" />

Furthermore, I think that in the discussion, Alex mentioned that may be the
@method attribute of p:serialization SHOULD be mandatory

Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
Received on Friday, 20 June 2008 06:17:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:41:40 UTC