- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 07:02:06 -0400
- To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <m21vd9lbgx.fsf@nwalsh.com>
James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> writes: > yes, but the nice thing about xproc steps is we don't *have* to map > them directly onto functions all the time ;) ... I think its natural > place to put it though we need to ensure we get the version option > defined as well for it. FWIW, I've already implemented HMAC SHA1 as an extension to p:hash. Or rather, Henry has, as I did little more than apply his patch. I believe he needed it for some interaction with Amazon. <p:hash algorithm="cx:hmac"> <p:with-param name="cx:accessKey" value="..."/> </p:hash> Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Birds are taken with pipes that imitate http://nwalsh.com/ | their own voices, and men with those | sayings that are most agreeable to | their own opinions.--Samuel Butler
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2010 11:02:43 UTC