- From: Richard D. Brown <rdbrown@Globeset.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:10:43 -0500
- To: "'Joseph M. Reagle Jr.'" <reagle@w3.org>, <dee3@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "'IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, "'John Boyer'" <jboyer@uwi.com>
Joseph, Comments follow... > >3.1.3 & 3.3.1: Suggest replacing "negotiation" with > "calculation". I > believe > >this refers to Diffie-Hellman and I think calculation is > more accurate than > >negotiation. Might even want to change 3.1.3 to be > "...calculation of > keying > >material such as Diffie-Hellman agreement." > > Done. Richard if you object, say so. > Agreed to some extent. Negotiation tends to imply some form of handshake (multiple exchanges) during establishement of the key. However, I think that "agreement" or "exchange" would be more accurate. The method that is used to establish the key is not necessarily based upon mathematics. > >3.2.1: Suggest simply replacing "document" with "element" > and dropping the > boxed > >comment. > > Now reads, "An XML-signature must be a well-balanced XML > region (as defined > by XML-Fragment) that begins and ends with a signature > element. [Charter]" > Why not simply "An XML-signature must be a well-formed XML element" Richard D. Brown
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 1999 10:11:15 UTC