W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: Last Call for C14N 1.1 (and updated WG notes)

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:27:29 -0500
To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, www-xml-canonicalization-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <200612211127.29337.reagle@mit.edu>

On Wednesday 20 December 2006 12:29, Grosso, Paul wrote:
> The XML Core WG announces the publication of and requests 
> review of the Last Call WD of:

I have read through the document online but in no way feel technically 
competent to do anything other than ask questions and make tentative 
1. Would it be useful at the very start of the document to simply say that 
changes from the version 1.0 are addressed in section 4?
2. I wonder what problem the XML declaration was posing for the decision to 
be made to remove it?
3. My memory is fuzzy, but I hope to internationalization people will 
comment on "new character model normalization" as I believe that was a 
concern to them in the first round.
4. "Note that an argument similar to this can be leveled against the XML 
canonicalization method": you are referring to version 1.1 or 1.0? 
5. "The C14N-20000119 Canonical XML draft alternated": here you are 
referring to the causation method that belonged to the XML working group, 
before the signature took it over. It would probably be helpful to 
disambiguate and be really clear at all times about which version is being 
spoken of and provide context if appropriate. Also, the casual reader might 
also wonder how this affects exclusive canonicalization. (I presume the 
answer is not at all, but it might be worthwhile to provide an 
understanding of the landscape.)

I would like to ask that when it comes to interoperability and 
implementations the XML signature applications be a necessary part of that 
process. That is, it would not be sufficient to show adoption and 
interoperability between two XML applications that are not used as part of 
signature processing.
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2006 16:27:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:10:16 UTC