- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:15:50 -0500
- To: <hirsch@zolera.com>, <xml-encryption@w3.org>
Frederick, I too have a sense that the text isn't quite right, but I was hoping folks would check me on it in this thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2002Jan/0023.html See Christian's original email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2002Jan/0017.html On Friday 11 January 2002 10:17, Frederick Hirsch wrote: > In the editors draft the section on encryption processing rules (4.1, > item 5) states > > . ( Note: If the Type is "content" the plaintext resulting from > decryption may not be well formed if the EncryptedData element was (a) > the root element of a document, or (b) has other siblings (e.g. PIs and > text nodes).) > > > I understand the first case - decrypting the EncryptedData element will > result in a document without a root element, which is not well-formed. > > I do not understand the second case. In the case of having text nodes, > this implies the EncryptedData element was the child of an element, when > decrypted there would be two text node children of that element, which is > legal isn't it? What am I missing here? > > thanks > > > --- > Frederick Hirsch > Zolera Systems, http://www.zolera.com/ > Information Integrity, XML Security -- 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, 11 January 2002 10:16:05 UTC