Subject: [Simple] Minor update to xcap-diff

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 11:58:16 -0500

Until it appears in the archives:
http://www.jdrosen.net/papers/draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-05.txt

This makes a schema change to eliminate ambiguity on the root element, 
as suggested by Martin Hynar.

This document was, and still is, ready to go.

-Jonathan R.
-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow                                   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[email-masked]                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: "Jeroen van Bemmel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 01:38:26 +0100

Probably considerably late, and not sure if appreciated, but here's a 
comment:

The bit about the optional "hash" attribute and using canonicalization and 
SHA1 sounds like a quick but limited way of doing XML-signature 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/). If I were a W3C person, I would argue 
that since there is already a standard for doing this, why not use that?

It seems a rather isolated feature and feels a bit out of place to me. Would 
it be an idea to remove it? I mean, server MAY include it, client MAY ignore 
it, and what is supposed to happen when server includes it, client checks 
it, and check fails?

Regards,
Jeroen

PS the reference to XML is outdated: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/ is newer 
than http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204/