- 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