- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 09:07:13 -0400
- To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- cc: <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com>, "XML Encryption WG " <xml-encryption@w3.org>
Seems like a reasonable idea although, to a great extent, the use of Canonicalization was outside of and as a prelude to encryption. But that use can be desinguished from Transform use... Donald From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010621172808.034afe60@localhost> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:29:30 -0400 To: "Donald Eastlake" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com> Cc: "XML Encryption WG " <xml-encryption@w3.org> >We could change the Canonicalization section to "Transform" including >Canonicalization as well as the OPTIONAL Signature Decryption Transform, >which we can reference once both these documents are published next week. > >-- >Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/ >W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org >IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature >W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Friday, 22 June 2001 09:08:07 UTC