- From: Takeshi Imamura <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:27:56 +0900
- To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: edsimon@xmlsec.com, XML Encryption WG <xml-encryption@w3.org>
Joseph, >Ok, I tried to increase the symmetry. However, when we are doing a replace >on encrypt are we: >1. returning the octets representing the characters of EncryptedData XML >available (I think so, but it's a shame to have to serialize!) >2. returning the DOM nodes representing the EncryptedData element available. >3. executing a DOM function (replace). > >When doing a replace on decrypt, same thing, octets or nodes? I think that when doing a replacement, something may be returned for application's convenience, e.g., as a DOM node, but it does not have to be required. >When otherwise making the data available to the application, I presume it's >always as octets serialization of the characters of the XML. The spec should be described as you presume, but I think that some implementation may return a DOM node corresponding to the octets serialization as far as applications obtain the same result. >Now that I've considered it, I'd think it should be REQUIRED to implement. I >don't think it makes much sense to release this spec and implementation >won't be able to be confident that a recipient can do a >encrypt/decrypt&replace. Can you think of any reason to it shouldn't be >REQUIRED? Do you mean that both are required to implement and whether doing a replacement or not depends on application's choice? If so, I agree with you. Thanks, Takeshi IMAMURA Tokyo Research Laboratory IBM Research imamu@jp.ibm.com
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2001 10:30:21 UTC