- From: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
- Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 17:29:32 +0200
- To: reagle@w3.org, jboyer@PureEdge.com
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
--On Freitag, 24. Mai 2002 18:34 -0400 Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org> wrote: > On Thursday 23 May 2002 17:13, Christian Geuer-Pollmann wrote: >> I implemented exclusive c14n for the Apache package. On my >> implementation, exclusive c14n is SLOWER than inclusive c14n: >> >> Factor between 1.3 and 1.6 > > Do you have a sense of why? In some cases I expect some variances, but > this is rather surprising. The intent was to simplify a number of things > c14n processing required such as (1) checking to see if the parent > element is in the subset on that xml:foo issue we've been discussing and > (2) if you have a subset in a small document, you don't have to walk up > the tree to find ancestor xml:foo attributes. Well, the main difference between inclusive and exclusive c14n is that in inclusive c14n, I can simply output the changes to the inscope namespace decls. In exclusive c14n, I also have to check whether a namespace is visibly utilized. That's the additional overhead. But I have to reduce this 1.3-1.6 to a lower level of 1.1-1.2. Regards, Christian
Received on Monday, 27 May 2002 11:24:24 UTC