W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?

From: Jesse Pelton <jsp@PKC.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 15:09:54 -0400
Message-ID: <CC6353ECB19ED4118E9500A0C99D6DCC08E45B@PKC_VT01>
To: "'Joseph M. Reagle Jr.'" <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: "'w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
That makes sense for all examples except the two I cited. Since those are
examples of specifying a CanonicalizationMethod, shouldn't they be
represented using that method? It seems confusing to give examples that are
invalid. If I understand the spec correctly, you couldn't actually validate
the example in 2.1, which is represented as a (presumably correct) detached
signature of the content of the XHTML 1.0 recommendation.

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. [mailto:reagle@w3.org]
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 3:00 PM
To: Jesse Pelton
Cc: 'w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org'
Subject: Re: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in

Examples in the dsig spec are not canonicalized. I added a sentence to 
[s03], "Note that this example, and all examples in this specification, are 
not in canonical form."
Received on Monday, 4 June 2001 15:11:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:10:05 UTC