- From: Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:13:40 -0500
- To: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Cc: ext Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>, "'XMLSec WG Public List'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
This is fine with me, though I think an additional sentence explaining why it should no longer be used would be useful. --Sean Frederick Hirsch wrote: > 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 15:14:21 UTC