- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:42:16 -0400
- To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@uwi.com>
- Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 11:15 99.08.20 -0700, John Boyer wrote:
>Although putting an exclusion list in the canonicalizer element is an
>interesting idea, it is certainly not the only place to put it. I sent a
>write-up to Joseph with several alternatives, which he said would soon be
>added as a comment to requirement 3.1.3.
Will be published today, the following links to both of your emails.
Comment: A related requirement under consideration is that of being
able to
indicate those portions of a document one signs via exclusion of
those portions
one does not wish to sign. This allows one to create signatures that
have
document closure, retain ancestor information when necessary, and
retain
element order of non-continuous regions that must be signed.We look
appreciate
feedback on options of meeting this requirement including a special
<c14n:exclude>
element, an exclude list accompanying the resource locator, a change
in the
fragment or XPointer specification that would yield this
functionality. See
List(Boyer(1,2)) for further discussion of this issue.
[1] http://www.w3.org/1999/08/xmldsig-requirements-990820.html
_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.
Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Friday, 20 August 1999 14:42:26 UTC