ISSUE-218: For canonical xml 2.0 is eliminating inclusive c14n an issue for xml:base etc (which use cases are impacted), and should QName aware be mandatory
For canonical xml 2.0 is eliminating inclusive c14n an issue for xml:base etc (which use cases are impacted), and should QName aware be mandatory
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Raised by:
- Opened on:
- 2010-11-16
- Description:
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- 2.0 Issues - status? (from Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com on 2011-01-03)
- ISSUE-218: For canonical xml 2.0 is eliminating inclusive c14n an issue for xml:base etc (which use cases are impacted), and should QName aware be mandatory (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2010-11-16)
Related notes:
[fjh]: see http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/c14n-20/#sec-Canonicalization-Parameters, also ISSUE-221
8 Mar 2011, 16:08:06Display change log
