- From: Blair Dillaway <blaird@exchange.microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 09:10:25 -0800
- To: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
- Cc: "Www-Xkms (E-mail)" <www-xkms@w3.org>
One other nit to resolve. I owe Phill a minor tweak to the examples so they'll conform to 'best practices'. They are technically correct, but the inclusive prefix lists on the Exc. C14N transforms that presently appear aren't required. I'll re-generate them and send to Phill by Monday. Blair -----Original Message----- From: www-xkms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xkms-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 6:19 AM To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip Cc: Www-Xkms (E-mail) Subject: Re: open issue? Thanks Phill, If we can resolve it by Monday it'll save an iteration on the "request for CR" text. Cheers, Stephen. Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > I seem to remember we changed the schema to ncname or something. I > will look into it today... > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie] >>Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 8:56 AM >>To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip; Www-Xkms (E-mail) >>Subject: open issue? >> >> >> >>Phill, >> >>The last call issues list [1] still shows an open issue (#312). >>I thought we'd killed 'em all ages ago - do you remember what's up >>with this? (We need to resolve it before next w3c hoop.) >> >>Ta, >>Stephen. >> >> >>[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/XKMS/Drafts/xkms-spec-lastcall-issues.html >> > >
Received on Friday, 5 December 2003 12:10:28 UTC