- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 09:25:43 -0500 (EST)
- To: rsalz@zolera.com (Rich Salz)
- Cc: david.orchard@bea.com (David Orchard), xml-dist-app@w3.org
> > > I'm thinking that we need to require that the root element of each > > > header block be unencrypted. In other words, the header "name" > > > and qualifiers (actor, mustUnderstand) MUST be visible. > > I think that's too limiting. For example, a SET-like protocol where I > encrypt my bank header such that your bank can see it, but you can't. > > I'd rather see us solve the problem in the documentation. I don't believe my suggestion prevents what you describe, as long as you're not trying to hide the existence of the header, just its value/content. I'm also not very familiar with SET, so I don't know whether it has a processing model that places visibility requirements on header names and qualifiers, as SOAP does. MB -- Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Friday, 11 January 2002 09:24:50 UTC