[xmlsec] Xml exclusive c14n

Alex Boese alexanderashleyboese at gmail.com
Mon Feb 23 12:49:20 PST 2015

Thanks for the feedback. I'll see if I can't reverify that observation. I'll also check with the lxml authors to see if they are utilizing that test suite, if my observations are repeatable.

Sent from my iPad

> On Feb 23, 2015, at 1:16 PM, Aleksey Sanin <aleksey at aleksey.com> wrote:
> Curious if lxml passes the W3C test suite for the cannonicalization :)
> Aleksey
>> On 2/23/15 10:14 AM, Alex Boese wrote:
>> I was noticing that exclusive canonicalization seems to differ between the lxml and xmlsec implementations. In my observations, if I exclusive c14n an entire xml document utilizing the lxml, namespaces that are unused are completely dropped. With xmlsec, if I do the same, they remain. 
>> By unused, I'm meaning a namespace with prefix that has no matching prefixed tags in children tags.
>> Is this deliberate behavior? If so, why the difference?
>> -Alex
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmlsec mailing list
>> xmlsec at aleksey.com
>> http://www.aleksey.com/mailman/listinfo/xmlsec

More information about the xmlsec mailing list