[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Genx c14n?

• To: XML Developer List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Genx c14n?
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:59:22 -0800

I think we're getting to the point where the most productive next step 
is to implement the library and see how it works in practice.  Except 
for one issue:

Q: Should genx produce canonical XML output?

I've worked on a couple projects in recent months where the XML 
messages would sometimes or always need to be signed, and I'm 
developing the general feeling that the world holds a *lot* of dsig 
technology; in private correspondence with some folks here I've heard 
horror stories about what people do to get canonical XML: parse, load 
into DOM, reserialize (a horror story in a high-volume app).  So I had 
the impression that if genx produced canonical XML that would be A Good 
Thing particularly if the cost was low.  The idea doesn't seem to be 
getting much of a welcome here.

Would anyone like to take this opportunity to shout "Yes, the world 
needs this!" or "No, the denominator of the cost/benefit ratio is 
zero!".

Cheers, Tim Bray  http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/

smime.p7s

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Genx c14n?
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: Genx c14n?
    • From: Adam Turoff <ziggy@p...>
  • RE: Genx c14n?
    • From: "Paul Sumner Downey" <Paul.Downey@w...>
  • Re: Genx c14n?
    • From: David Tolpin <dvd@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Microsoft files for XML patents, says C|Net
• Next by Date: RE: Microsoft files for XML patents, says C|Net
• Previous by thread: Bill KBE
• Next by thread: Re: Genx c14n?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread