- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 22:11:25 -0400
- To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, lde008@dma.isg.mot.com
In order to go to Draft Standard, the IETF requires there be two indepenent interoperable implementations of each significant option/feature. As far as I can tell, there are none for Minimal Canonicalization. Unless a couple pop up in the next few days, say by next Tuesday, I suggest that it be dropped from the specification. Thanks, Donald From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010404122156.01ffe008@rpcp.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 12:23:44 -0400 To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010403173259.02727d70@rpcp.mit.edu> >Oh, two other things to note, in the first CR we asked for feedback on the >use of XPath terminology, and whether minC14N should be downgraded to >optional. We didn't have any feedback on either, so I expect we should leave >them as is. >__ >Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/ >W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org >IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature >W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Thursday, 5 April 2001 22:11:39 UTC