- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 09:52:40 -0400
- To: "Gregor Karlinger" <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>
- Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com>, Ed Simon <ed.simon@entrust.com>
My preference is for element only as well for Transforms. Does anyone oppose this. Ed/John, is the mixed content for Transforms even relevant to the types of transforms we'd expect people to write now? At 15:40 9/1/2000 +0200, Gregor Karlinger wrote: > > At 08:29 9/1/2000 +0200, Gregor Karlinger wrote: > > >Yes, I think it would be fine to have the same structure for all kind of > > >algorithms. > > > > But are you arguing for consistency or for mixed? I could make them all > > element only. > >I am arguing mainly for consistency. I personally would feel better with >element only; if somebody wants to have mixed content, he can define a >parameter element which allows this mixed content. _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Friday, 1 September 2000 09:52:48 UTC