- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:59:18 -0400
- To: Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>
- Cc: public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org
On 2007-07-30 15:38:29 -0400, Sean Mullan wrote: >> I thought the answer to that was "no", sticking to our "minimal >> changes" mantra. > Right, but I don't know of any XML Signature implementations that > don't support Exclusive C14N. And we're adding a new requirement > for C14N 1.1 which is as much of a change in my opinion. Well, that is a change that was called out in our charter. I realize that we could add the reference to Exclusive without changing conformance, and agree that having a full catalogue of relevant algorithms and IDs would be very useful; I just think we need to draw the line somewhere for this iteration. -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 20:59:24 UTC