- From: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:57:29 -0500
- To: "'XMLSec WG'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Frederick Hirsch'" <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Sorry I won't be on the call, but the small item I had was just to ask whether the new extension schema for 1.1 should make use of xml:id anywhere that it declares an Id attribute in the draft. I didn't think about it at the time and we just left them as "Id" for consistency. We probably should have used xml:id, and I imagine that isn't too controversial, but we should decide. Specific examples: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core1/#sec-ECKeyValue http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core1/#sec-DEREncodedKeyValue -- Scott
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2009 20:58:05 UTC