- From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:11:32 +0000
- To: <tlr@w3.org>
- CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
The least work to remove the self reference would be to do what I suggest here. Keeps it fairly easy if you want to reinstall the reference in a stand-alone request later (if you use ReSpec) regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Aug 16, 2011, at 12:32 PM, ext Thomas Roessler wrote: > On 2011-08-16, at 17:36 +0200, <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: > >> Thomas, all >> >> I think it is a very confusing policy to embed a registration document within another document as the references for the two become intermixed and formatting becomes that of the enclosing document etc >> >> That said, the XML Encryption 1.1 media type section contains many references that are now listed in the references of the enclosing document. I think we should keep it that way to simplify maintenance of references (also that is where you'd expect to find document references as a reader). >> > > It's fine with me to keep the registration's references in the enclosing document. I can fix this effect when the registration request gets submitted. > >> There are also a number of references to XML Encryption 1.1, the enclosing document. >> >> Putting each inline and attempting to maintain it would be a mistake. > >> Thus I think we should go with another approach mentioned on the call today, and change each reference in this section to XML Encryption 1.1 to be the text >> "XMLENC-CORE1 (this document)" instead of [XMLENC-CORE1]. This should be clear within the context of the enclosing document and similar to the reference that would be used in a separate media type submission request. No corresponding reference will be included in the list of references. > > No strong opinion either way on my side — this is the level of detail where I'd be happy to make the decision based on whatever is less work. > >
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2011 17:12:14 UTC