- From: John Boyer <jboyer@PureEdge.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:47:24 -0700
- To: <muraw3c@attglobal.net>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
- Cc: <w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org>, <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>
Hi all, xml version came up quite a while ago, and we decided to leave it out. Our rationale was the same one given by Tim Bray several months earlier, namely that by leaving it out, we are implicitly declaring the document to be v1.0. We are canonicalizing xml v1.0, not xml v1.1. We can easily issue a new c14n recommendation once the data models begin to support storage of the xml declaration. I don't know about the latest version of infoset (yet), but prior versions of infoset didn't include the xml declaration, which is why the prior c14n group also omitted the xml declaration. I believe that an infoset for versions of xml after 1.0 MUST include the xml declaration, and I cannot see the W3C failing to issue another XPath based on the infoset data model to address the additional components of xml 1.1+. John Boyer Development Team Leader, Distributed Processing and XML PureEdge Solutions Inc. Creating Binding E-Commerce v: 250-479-8334, ext. 143 f: 250-479-3772 1-888-517-2675 http://www.PureEdge.com <http://www.pureedge.com/> -----Original Message----- From: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of muraw3c@attglobal.net Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 8:09 AM To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org Cc: w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org; w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org Subject: Omission of the XML Version in C14N The last call perior for the new C14N WD is over. I should have raised one issue. Canonicalized documents do not contain XML declarations. Is this OK? First, XML should allow some of the newly-introducedcharacters of Unicode 3.0 as name characters. If we introduce them in V1.1 of XML, validity (e.g., NMTOKEN) of an XML document will be dependent on the XML version. Second, Unicode character properties may vary, and thus the same Unicode-aware regular expression of XML Schema Part 2 may behave differently for different versions of XML. Even if the XML version info is absent from APIs such as SAX and DOM, should we always generate <?xml version="1.0"?>? Cheers, IBM Tokyo Research Lab & International University of Japan, Research Institute MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) Speaking for himself only.
Received on Tuesday, 1 August 2000 18:47:44 UTC