- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:49:20 +0200
- To: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
then go for it -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org> (@roessler) On 2011-08-16, at 19:11 +0200, <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: > 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 17:49:22 UTC