- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:09:47 -0400
- To: "Gregor Karlinger" <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>
- cc: "XML" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
I suppose that it is partly the effect where computer people are overly systematic in wordforms... Also, I would have guessed that "canonization" to declare some particular form to be the canonical form, while "canonicalization" is to transform something... Donald From: "Gregor Karlinger" <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at> Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 07:46:17 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-Id: <200008241146.e7OBkHG18986@www19.w3.org> To: "XML" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:46:35 +0200 Message-ID: <NDBBIMACDKCOPBLEJCCDKEPCCJAA.gregor.karlinger@iaik.at> >Hi all! > >Maybe this question is kind of philosophical, but does anybody of >you know why the term "Canonicalization" is written as it is? > >Recently I tried to find out, what it means to produce a canonical >form of something: > >According to the Merriam-Webster Englisch Dictionary [1] the only >explanation which fits is: > > to canonize: to treat as illustrious, preeminent > >This makes sense, since the canonical form of an XML-Document is >a prominent form of many representaions for the logical XML structure. > >But the noun for the process of canonizing something is: > > canonization > >However, I could not find "canonicalization" or "canonicalize" in any >dictionary I have access to. > >--- >[1] http://www.m-w.com/ > >Regards, (A completely confused) 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 Thursday, 24 August 2000 08:07:01 UTC