- From: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:27:09 +0900
- To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
In message "Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization"
on 01/06/14, "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> writes:
> With respect to the issue of excluding ancestor context from the canonical
> form of a signature[1], the WG should pursue option:
>
> 1. Specify the exclusive canonicalization as part of the non-normative (nor
> required to implement) dsig-more specification [2].
> 2.Specify the exclusive canonicalization as part of the normative
> xmldsig-core as proposed in [3] (but with the URIs of [4]) as [REQUIRED,
> RECOMMENDED, OPTIONAL]. (This option requires interoperable implementation
> of this feature before xmldsig advances.)
I think we should do 2 as possible. (Un)fortunately we don't
have Proposed Recommendation of dsig-core yet.
RECOMMENDED is suitable because we don't need it in all cases.
--
TAMURA Kent @ Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2001 22:27:44 UTC