- From: Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 05:56:40 -0600
- To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, XMLSec XMLSec <public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF96577D2F.262AFAB2-ON862573D6.00411C5E-862573D6.00419D09@us.ibm.com>
First of all, your current statement talks about implementations, suggest you reword to In considering these use cases and requirements, the Working Group's attention is in particular called to performance and efficiency for various deployments. Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122 From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> To: Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, XMLSec XMLSec <public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org> Date: 01/18/2008 07:09 AM Subject: Re: Charter decision next Tuesday On 2008-01-17 20:39:09 +0000, Anthony Nadalin wrote: > Concern here is that this proposed charter does not address the > issues that we have today such as performance and footprint. It > seems to be continuing to go down the existing path, we should be > exploring way not to have to use C14N and smaller more efficient > algorithms. The current draft says explicitly: In considering these use cases and requirements, the Working Group's attention is in particular called to the performance and memory efficiency of implementations. The language on canonicalization is phrased to open the door toward smaller and more efficient algorithms. It would be helpful if you could propose concrete edits that would help to address your concerns. Thanks, -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
- image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif
Received on Sunday, 20 January 2008 12:50:02 UTC