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

Re: Comments on 22 June Version...

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 14:51:08 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, Brian LaMacchia <bal@microsoft.com>
        $Revision: 1.87 $ on $Date: 2001/06/25 18:50:34 $

At 22:52 6/24/2001, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote:
>Section 4.3.1: one occurance of "CanonicalizationMethod" has the
></code> before, instead of after, the last letter.


>Section In both the DTD and Schema, the "stylesheet" element
>should occur in addition to the "XPath" element.

I think you mean We dropped the XLST element, <stylesheet> can be 
included by the app.

>Section 4.4: The first three in the list of Type URIs is missing the
>colon (":") after the "http".


>Maybe I'm just missing something but why, in 4.4.3, does it say that
>keying information obtained by a RetrievalMethod "may need to be
>canonicalized"? Even if the KeyInfo is signed, the signature is over
>the RetrievalMethod element and content, not over what is retrieved,

I think this is because you "may" sign the data obtained by RetrievalMethod.

>Section 4.4.5: Seems a bit odd in just saying that PGPKeyID is a
>string.  Actually, I belive, PGPKeyID's are 8 octet binary quantities
>so it would seem like it should say they are Base64 encoded...

I'm not sure. Brian?

>Section 7.3: At the end, the last points two numbered don't seem
>connected to the rest of the text.  Suggest preceeding them with "To
>avoid these problems, applications may need to:" or the like.


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 Monday, 25 June 2001 14:56:36 UTC

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