Re: Call for Implementation: Canonical XML Becomes a W3C Candidate Recommendation

> > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/10/10-c14n-interop

> 1. Is the requirement with respect to parsing and relative-URI-ns (reporting 
> it as an error and not expanding) already implemented in the parser, or 
> logic you had to add on for the time being?

I have never seen a parser expanding relative namespace URIs to
abosolute URIs.  Our implementations uses Xerces-J parser.
Xerces-J does not report errors against relative namespace URIs.
So our implementation checks relative namespace URIs.

> 2. <Boyer>One of the final editorial tweaks that Joseph asked me to make was 
> to amend the beginning of section 2.1 to make it clear that document 
> subsetting and node-set input meant the same thing.  When I say node-set 
> input is recommended (as opposed to required), I'm saying that a conformant 
> implementation should but is not required to do document subsetting as 
> described in Section 2.4 and exemplified in Section 3.7. Since ... you have 
> working code for example 3.7, I am just writing to ask whether this does 
> indeed mean you created your implementation using XPath node-sets. </Boyer>

Yes.  Our implementation can process node-set inputs created
with Xalan-J's XPath module.

-- 
TAMURA Kent @ Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM

Received on Wednesday, 1 November 2000 01:11:01 UTC