- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:51:12 -0500
- To: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-tag@w3.org
Elliotte Harold writes:
>> If the canonicalization is exclusive, there's no problem. Either issue
only arises with original C14N.
Sorry, was distracted when I typed that and briefly swapped the
definitions of the two. Do you agree that the question I asked remains
significant, albeit with c14n, which is the one that propagates the xml
namespaced attributes? Thanks, and sorry for the confusion.
--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
02/18/05 12:11 PM
To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-tag@w3.org
Subject: Re: Trying to assess the depth of xml:id and c14n incompatibilities
noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> I still have a fundamental question about the presumed use cases. Let's
> assume we're dealing with a Web Services scenario, and that (exclusive)
> c14n is being used at least in part in the obvious way to support dsig,
If the canonicalization is exclusive, there's no problem. Either issue
only arises with original C14N.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim
Received on Friday, 18 February 2005 17:54:38 UTC