- From: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:39:38 -0500
- To: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Cc: ext Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>, "'Sean Mullan'" <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>, "'XMLSec WG Public List'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Thomas and I talked about this, how about replacing "Use of the MgmtData element is deprecated." with "Support of the MgmtData element in implementations is optional. The element SHOULD NOT be used." http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-MgmtData regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote: > I believe it means, not to be used. I could not find a definition in > the W3 process document. > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch > Nokia > > > > On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:00 PM, ext Scott Cantor wrote: > >> Sean Mullan wrote on 2009-12-08: >>> I think we should define what the term "deprecated" means. How >>> should >>> implementations treat MgmtData? Should they ignore it, or treat it >>> as an >>> error? Or is it optional for implementations to support it? If not >>> clear, this could be interpreted by implementations differently. >> >> As a suggestion, I believe that MgmtData is OPTIONAL to support now, >> but >> that the intent of the deprecation is to signal deployers and >> profilers that >> relying on it for new scenarios is ill-advised? >> >> -- Scott >> >> >
Received on Monday, 14 December 2009 14:40:34 UTC