- From: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:58:55 -0500
- To: "'Pratik Datta'" <PRATIK.DATTA@oracle.com>, "'XMLSec WG Public List'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Pratik Datta wrote on 2010-01-21: > I see where are you going with this "Type". It is like how > <CanonicalizationMethod> has an Algorithm which says how to process the > canonilicalization. Similarly you want <dsig2:Selection> to have a "Type". > Maybe we can rename it to "Algorithm" too. I intended it to capture everything that could be found inside <dsig2:Selection> and how you use it, so Algorithm probably is a better name based on how it's used elsewhere now. That doesn't strictly preclude adding "yet another layer of indirection" somewhere inside the element's content, I agree. I just favored trying to limit those layers if it makes sense. > For the respec conversion that I am doing now, I will just keep the current > meaning of type/subtype i.e. the one that is in the current draft, and we > can discuss this in the meeting. Ok. I'm inclined to go with whatever people prefer on the XPath side of things, I don't feel strongly about it. I *may* be inclined to suggest an alternate "simpler" Algorithm that doesn't use XPath at all, but I'm not there just yet. -- Scott
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2010 23:59:25 UTC