- From: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>
- Date: 2000年9月28日 17:12:18 +0900
- To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
- Message-Id: <200009280812.RAA10090@ns.trl.ibm.com>
Members of my group read the latest Canonical XML [1] and the latest XML Signature [2]. The following are comments on [1] from members. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000907 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xmldsig-core-20000918/ 2.3 Processing Model o Element Nodes Please add a note that resultant octets may not be well-formed XML. o Namespace Nodes, the first sentence "the node's parent element" is confusing. Some members misunderstood "the node's parent element" was "the parent element of the element that is owner of the namepace node". They think attribute nodes and namespace nodes have no *parent* element, but have the *owner* element. 3 Examples of XML Canonicalization o All examples We could not see whether LF exists or not in each line. Write visible LFs in examples like <em><font color=red>LF</font></em>, please. 3.6 UTF-8 Encoding "#xC2#xA9" is confusing. Change font or color of this. We want hexadecimal dumps of the Input Document and the Canonical Form. 4.6 Superfluous Namespace Declarations This section does not describe that xmlns:xml="..." nodes are omitted. -- TAMURA Kent @ Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2000 04:12:53 UTC