Re: Canonical XML revision

Just to speak for a different part of IBM...

I strongly agree with you and disagree with John.  I think it would be a 
big mistake to change the current definition of C14N.  There are too 
many ways for new and old software and to-be-signed data files to 
interact that could end up with misleading errors, false negatives, or 
excessive work.  And as mother always said, "two wrongs don't make a right."

	/r$

-- 
SOA Appliance Group
IBM Application Integration Middleware
* This address is going away; please use rsalz@us.ibm.com *

Received on Friday, 16 December 2005 16:11:38 UTC