Re: Bad news! RE: History: Question on C14N list of nodes instead of subtrees

On Tuesday 29 January 2002 04:06, Karl Scheibelhofer wrote:
> (btw, does step 4 in this section mean that step 4 should be repeated
> for each descendant element of E? i guess it should.)

I defer to John, but I presume that once an element node E is processed, it 
doesn't get processed again.

> i see that there is a problem with using XPointer in XMLDsig, if it is
> not sure when it will become recommendation.

Karl, I'm still not very confident in the progress and deployment of 
XPointer. I'm glad you are able to use it for fast subtree processing but 
the expressions when encoded as URIs aren't very readable and an omission 
filter is not readily expressible. On the plus side, I expect the new XPath 
transform will be smaller, will be trivial to implement given the present 
code, and we can advance even faster than the exc-c14n spec.


Joseph Reagle Jr.       
W3C Policy Analyst      
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair
W3C XML Encryption Chair

Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 09:16:01 UTC