Friday, 28 September 2001
- Removal of XML/Schema Validation Transforms
- Tweak to Schema
- WWW2002 CFP
- XML Digital Signature Demo and Library
- Re: X509 Schema Tweaks (Was: XML Signature schema implementation)
Thursday, 27 September 2001
- RE: X509 Schema Tweaks (Was: XML Signature schema implementation)
- Re: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- X509 Schema Tweaks (Was: XML Signature schema implementation)
- Re: Should we define a "critical" flag for ds:Object
- Re: Should we define a "critical" flag for ds:Object
- Should we define a "critical" flag for ds:Object
- Re: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- Re: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
Wednesday, 26 September 2001
Tuesday, 25 September 2001
Monday, 24 September 2001
Friday, 21 September 2001
- Re: XML Signature schema implementation
- RE: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- Re: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- Re: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- RE: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- RE: Purpose of CRL
- RE: Purpose of CRL
- RE: Purpose of CRL
- Purpose of CRL
- Re: XML Signature schema implementation
- Re: Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
Thursday, 20 September 2001
Wednesday, 19 September 2001
- Poll (Was: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform))
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
Tuesday, 18 September 2001
- Re: Fw: Re:Call for Review: XML Digital Signature is a W3C Proposed Recommendation
- RE: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Fw: Re:Call for Review: XML Digital Signature is a W3C Proposed Recommendation
Friday, 14 September 2001
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Re: X509SubjectName and binary values
Thursday, 13 September 2001
Wednesday, 12 September 2001
- Re: latest draft xmldsig
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
Tuesday, 11 September 2001
Monday, 10 September 2001
- Re: xml/digsig mime type?
- xml/digsig mime type?
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
Sunday, 10 September 800
Thursday, 6 September 2001
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Comment from PR Review: Is XML1.0 parsing well-formed or validating?
Wednesday, 5 September 2001
- Encoding whitespace in DNAME (Was: W3C Proposed Recommendation:)
- Re: Responses to two Character Model last call issues
- Re: Schema Contributions to C14N (Was: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section)
- Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- RE: FW: Base64
Tuesday, 4 September 2001
- Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)
- Re: FW: Base64
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: FW: Base64
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
Monday, 3 September 2001
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Signature overview - minor additional modifications
- Comments for PR-xmldsig-core-20010820
Saturday, 1 September 2001
Friday, 31 August 2001
Thursday, 30 August 2001
- Join the fight to quality. Make 36 Annually secured
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
Wednesday, 29 August 2001
- RE: FW: Base64
- Re: FW: Base64
- Re: FW: Base64
- RE: FW: Base64
- Responses to two Character Model last call issues
- RE: FW: Base64
- Re: Error in DSAKeyValue DTD/Schema
Tuesday, 28 August 2001
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: FW: Base64
- Re: Schema Validation Transform
- Error in DSAKeyValue DTD/Schema
- RE: FW: Base64
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- RE: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation:
- RE: Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- Schema Validation Transform
Monday, 27 August 2001
- Re: Same-document reference
- Re: Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- Re: Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- RE: Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- RE: Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- Re: Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- Why is the Target attribute in SignatureProperty required?
- Same-document reference
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-xmldsig-core-2-01.txt
Friday, 24 August 2001
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
Thursday, 23 August 2001
- Re: signature overview question/comment
- How to multi-sign?
- Re: How to multi-sign?
- How to multi-sign?
Wednesday, 22 August 2001
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: signature overview question/comment
Tuesday, 21 August 2001
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Re: Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
- Enveloped-signature games with pre-c14n
Monday, 20 August 2001
Friday, 17 August 2001
Thursday, 16 August 2001
Wednesday, 15 August 2001
- Re: Base64
- Re: XPath Expression
- Re: Problem with indentation
- Re: Tweaked Section 6.4.1
- RE: signature overview question/comment
Tuesday, 14 August 2001
Friday, 10 August 2001
Thursday, 9 August 2001
Tuesday, 7 August 2001
Thursday, 9 August 2001
Tuesday, 7 August 2001
Monday, 6 August 2001
Thursday, 2 August 2001
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- Re: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- Re: a typo in section 6.4.1 ?
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- RE: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- Re: Re: Re: XPath Expression
- Re: Re: XPath Expression
- Re: XPath Expression
- Re: Re: XPath Expression
- Re: XPath Expression
- Re: XPath Expression
- Re: XPath Expression
- a typo in section 6.4.1 ?
- XPath Expression
Wednesday, 1 August 2001
Tuesday, 31 July 2001
- RE: Question: Base64 Transform Nodeset Input
- RE: Question: Base64 Transform Nodeset Input
- RE: Question: Base64 Transform Nodeset Input
- Re: Minutes of 2001-07-30 Teleconf
- Question: Transform Nodeset Input
- Question: Base64 Transform Nodeset Input
Monday, 30 July 2001
- Join the Middle Class Rich!
- Exclusive C14N (Was: Minutes of 2001-07-30 Teleconf)
- Minutes of 2001-07-30 Teleconf
- RE: Questions about c14n implementation
- RE: Questions about c14n implementation
- Re: Questions about c14n implementation
- Re: Questions about c14n implementation
- Questions about c14n implementation
Saturday, 28 July 2001
Friday, 27 July 2001
- RE: C14N Argument
- Comment on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Section 4.3.3.2
- Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
- RE: Section 4.3.3.2
- RE: C14N Argument
- RE: C14N Argument
- Re: Section 4.3.3.2
- RE: C14N Argument
- Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
- RE: C14N Argument
- clarifications on XML Schema base64Binary type
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: ID/DTD/c14n/dsig mischief?
Thursday, 26 July 2001
Wednesday, 25 July 2001
- RE: C14N Argument
- RE: C14N Argument
- RE: C14N Argument
- XSLT and Schema Processing Model within XMLDSIG
- C14N Argument
- Surreptitious Forwarding
- xmldsig Call 13:00 EST July 30
- Python Canonical XML
- Re: What's a relative Namespace URI?
- Re: What's a relative Namespace URI?
- What's a relative Namespace URI?
Tuesday, 24 July 2001
- Canonical XML implementation
- Publication of Draft ETSI TS "XML Advanced Electronic Signatures" for public comment: CORRECT LINK: STF178Task3Draft.pdf
- Publication of Draft ETSI TS on XML Advanced Electronic Signatures for public comment
Tuesday, 17 July 2001
Monday, 16 July 2001
- Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: Editorial problem in Section 4.2 of digital signature spec
- Re: Editorial problem in Section 4.2 of digital signature spec
Sunday, 15 July 2001
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Editorial problem in Section 4.2 of digital signature spec
Friday, 13 July 2001
Thursday, 12 July 2001
- Re: Schema Contributions to C14N (Was: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section)
- Schema Contributions to C14N (Was: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section)
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- RE: ID/DTD/c14n/dsig mischief?
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- RE: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- ARe: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- ID/DTD/c14n/dsig mischief?
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
- xfdl and xfa
- Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
- RE: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
Wednesday, 11 July 2001
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Re: initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section
Monday, 9 July 2001
- Section 4.3.3.2
- initial Exclusive Canonicalization draft
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- Re: SPKIData.ANY
- Re: CDATA vs. EMPTY
- Re: CDATA vs. EMPTY
Sunday, 8 July 2001
Saturday, 7 July 2001
- Re: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
Friday, 6 July 2001
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
Thursday, 5 July 2001
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- RE: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- Re: Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- Canonicalization of <SignedInfo> for Reference Validation
- RE: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- Describing Objects (Was: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference)
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- RE: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- Re: DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference
- DateTime (DT) attribute in Reference