RE: Syntax for C14N2.0 profiles

• From: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>
• Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:53:37 -0400
• To: "'Pratik Datta'" <pratik.datta@oracle.com>, "'XMLSec WG Public List'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <00dc01cb16fb$995136f0$cbf3a4d0$@osu.edu>

> Or should we just define profiles as a combination of parameters that need
> to be supported by implementation, but there would be no indication in the
> syntax that a particular profile is being used.

That would be my preference. I think this is a conformance issue, not an
implementation issue.

> I prefer the later. The problem with the first approach is that profiles
> also need parameters - i.e. a
> exclusive-canonical-xml-1.0-nocomments" would need the
> InclusiveNamespacePrefixList as parameters. This would get very confusing.

It would be a mess.

-- Scott

Received on Monday, 28 June 2010 19:54:06 UTC