- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 17:28:44 -0400
- To: Juha Pääjärvi <juha@firsthop.com>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
At 17:08 00/03/26 +0300, Juha Pääjärvi wrote: >draft. But I think that there should be a lightweight alternative for XML >c14n because c14n is limited to complete documents, needs a DTD or a >schema and is unnecessarily complicated for many applications. I think it's pretty clear we are going to have to address how to serialize (c14n) XML fragments. If we went with Gregor's proposal [1], we might not need your intermediate level. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JanMar/0156.html __ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JanMar/0256.html ... >To conclude: I think it would be beneficial to replace the minimal >canonicalization with a lightweight canonicalization that had the >following properties: > -Can be applied on elements and whole documents > -Does not require a DTD or schema for processing > -Does remove the most common sources of alternation in XML documents > -Canonicalization can be done for DOM tree and SAX events > >The souces of alternation that should be removed are at least the >following: > -Character set normalization (UTF-8, I guess) > -White spaces (spaces, tabs and line breaks) > -Possibly attribute order (for example convert to alphabetical order) > >Any comments to the canonicalization requirements, are welcome. I have not >designed those requirements thoroughly, so it's quite possible that I >missed something there. _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 6 April 2000 17:38:02 UTC