Re: [bdxr] Candidate Business Document Envelope Version 1.1 CSD02

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

At 2016-07-08 15:11 +0000, Kenneth Bengtsson wrote:
> 1) Shouldn't we declare new namespaces for BDE 1.1 considering that 
> there are important (though backwards compatible) schema changes from 1.0?

If we change the namespaces then BDE 1.1 is no longer backwards 
compatible.  Instances of BDE 1.0 would not validate with the BDE 1.1 
schemas.  The namespaces cannot change if we are to claim such 
backwards compatibility.  In retrospect I might have used 
".../bde/1/..." instead of ".../bde/1.0/...", but I don't see it as 
that important, myself.  All minor versions are based on 1.0.

> 2) In case you choose to include the section about encrypted payload 
> for multiple recipients I propose adding the "SHOULD" keyword to 
> section 1.2.1, and to add CMS, PGP and XML Enc as non-normative (or 
> informative) references.

Done!  I'm working on adding the new section regarding encrypted 
payloads as an informative annex.

. . . . . . . . Ken


--
Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources |
Streaming hands-on XSLT/XPath 2 training @US$45: http://goo.gl/Dd9qBK |
Crane Softwrights Ltd. _ _ _ _ _ _ http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ |
G Ken Holman _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com |
Google+ blog _ _ _ _ _ http://plus.google.com/+GKenHolman-Crane/posts |
Legal business disclaimers: _ _ http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal |


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus