RE: Comment on Canonical XML draft of 2000-06-01, clause A.3

Hi Gregor,

Excellent work. I see that now.  The list of children of root does not
include text nodes, so I can add a sentence to c14n section 1 explicitly
stating that there are no text node children of root, then tweak the c14n of
PIs and comments to say that the closing ?> or --> will be followed by a
single #xA if the node is a child of the root.

Note to implementers:  this makes 2 confirmed changes so far

1) The change above will (and obviously must) happen.
2) Also recall earlier comments on this list that mean we must change text
node rendering to include changing all '>' characters to > (as was the
case in the prior c14n spec).  Based on XML [1] rules 10, 15 and 16, this
change is not needed for PIs, comments, attributes and namespaces.

Thank you,
John Boyer
Software Development Manager
PureEdge Solutions Inc. (formerly UWI.Com)
Creating Binding E-Commerce
jboyer@PureEdge.com


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org
[mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Gregor Karlinger
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 2:19 AM
To: John Boyer; w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Cc: TAMURA Kent
Subject: RE: Comment on Canonical XML draft of 2000-06-01, clause A.3


Ups, no references included ...

[1] XML Information Set: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset#infoitem.document
[2] XML XPath Language: http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#root-node
[3] XML 1.0: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-white-space

> Since neither the XML Infoset [1] nor the XPath data model [2] allow text
> children in the root element, I don't see a good foundation for your
> interpretation of [3].

Gregor
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gregor Karlinger
mailto://gregor.karlinger@iaik.at
http://www.iaik.at
Phone +43 316 873 5541
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications
Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Monday, 5 June 2000 15:42:38 UTC