- From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:42:31 +0100
- To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
r/reagle@w3.org/2001.07.12/18:54:45 >At 07:58 7/12/2001, merlin wrote: >>The encoding (and, incidentally, your algorithm URI) belongs in &more; > >If I understand you, I don't agree with this. This specification should >define its own identifier. Why would it exist in &more;? I just look at &exc; as the specification for an algorithm and &more; as a specification for how certain algorithms are identified and encoded for use in &dsig;. In much the same way, &c14n; specifies an algorithm and &dsig; specifies (among other things) algorithm identifiers and parameter encoding. The &exc; document is not tied to &dsig; and really doesn't need to know how it will be encoded. If this is not how things are, then I'm wrong. merlin ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct, special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on. In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or appearance at trade shows and conferences. This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including computer viruses. http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Sunday, 15 July 2001 18:43:37 UTC