- From: Dournaee, Blake <bdournaee@rsasecurity.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:52:25 -0800
- To: "'reagle@w3.org'" <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: XML Encryption WG <xml-encryption@w3.org>
Hello All, I am pondering the choice of the media-type tree referent in [1], Section 4.3 Does anyone know why the media type tree is hosted at www.isi.edu (or if this isn't "the" tree, why isn't it at www.iana.org, or something similar). I am just wondering about the history of this. Further, these media type designations are the same ones referred to in the DSig spec as used in the "MimeType" attribute for the <Object> element. The values suggested here are the bare media types names without the fully qualified URI shown in the XML Encryption specification. This seems odd, is there a compelling reason to have these be different between the specifications? With anticipated use of both of these technologies together, this just seems weird. [1] http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/media-types/media-types Blake Dournaee Toolkit Applications Engineer RSA Security "The only thing I know is that I know nothing" - Socrates -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Reagle [mailto:reagle@w3.org] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 2:36 PM To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip; Eastlake III Donald-LDE008; 'w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org' Subject: Re: My latest try on Exclusive XML Canonicalization On Friday 26 October 2001 13:00, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > Since we are dealing with the specification of an octet stream it would > be useful to see the exact octetstream output that is defined. Phill, For c14n, John Boyer had included the characters as close as possible in a comment with each example. We could do that, but I'm most interested in a tarball of examples with pre/post. > It is not clear to me (from the text) whether the indentation in the > examples is pretty printing that should be ignored or part of the C14N > and if removed whether there should be spaces tabs or whatnots between > the elements. The white space is the same as C14N. > Overall it would be useful to see a description of XML Signature itself > in the same notation, giving the exact octet stream to be presented to > the digest or signature algorithm. I'm not sure what you mean by notation. Literal octets and their digests seems to work well. -- * I will be in France from 3-9 November for the W3C AC Meeting. 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 Monday, 29 October 2001 18:52:35 UTC