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

RE: Signature Portability, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.

From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 17:46:19 -0400
Message-ID: <1DE737930E15D511B64400D0B76FE2620C0C73@ma07exm01.corp.isg.mot.com>
To: "'Joseph M. Reagle Jr.'" <reagle@w3.org>, Mark Bartel <mbartel@thistle.ca>
Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
I do not agree that the namespace will have to be changed or that, necessarily, any separate document is needed.


-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. [mailto:reagle@w3.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 2:05 PM
To: Mark Bartel
Cc: Donald Eastlake 3rd; w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org; Donald.Eastlake
Subject: Re: Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.

At 11:11 6/13/2001, Mark Bartel wrote:
>and have any signatures in <A> still be verifiable without having to 
>isolate the <A> element. I would personally call this an interoperability 
>issue, but strictly speaking it is a composition issue, and I'm not sure 
>this type of composition is mandated by the requirements [1] (see #3).

Mark, I agree that it would be a useful thing to have. However, I think the 
composing XML applications are going to have to address this issue 
regardless, and if we do address it as REQUIRED as Don suggested, we're 
going to have to change the namespace for xlmdsig and take extra time to the 
Repulsive Canonical XML to REC. I'm happy for it to be specified externally, 
and even reach REC orthogonally (not speaking of Standard since we didn't do 
that with Canonical XML) but the mandatoriness will be expensive for &dsig; 
in terms of time and its affect on implementations. The question is, do 
people think it's justified? (It may well be, that's just not where my bias 
is presently.)

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 Wednesday, 13 June 2001 17:46:39 UTC

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