santuario-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Raul Benito" <r...@apache.org>
Subject Re: What is XMLUtils::addReturnToElement for?
Date Wed, 04 Apr 2007 21:01:35 GMT
I think, you can change the code as much as you want.
But there is some feature to make this return optionals. The only place
where the standard force it are in the Base64 representation of the digest
and signature value, that must be split at 80 chars (apache xmlsec does not
have any problem with this, but perhaps other implementations relay on this)

Regards,

Raul


On 4/4/07, Michael McIntosh <mikemci@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> I was refering to the Java version - but my notation has betrayed my C++
> roots ;-)
>
> raul.benito.garcia@gmail.com wrote on 04/04/2007 03:31:49 PM:
>
> > Hi Mike,
> > With your notation I think you are referring to C++ version. Don't you?
>
> > On 4/4/07, Michael McIntosh < mikemci@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > I know what XMLUtils::addReturnToElement does, by why do it?
> > I acknowledge that adding the occasional line to an XML document makes
> it
> > more readable in certain circumstances, but I'd really like to be able
> to
> > turn it off.
> > Actually I'd like to leave it alone, but a system I need to interoperate
>
> > with cannot accept Signatures with whitespaces in certain places.
> > No need to tell me its should be allowed - I know - but I cannot change
> > their code.
> > I have a fix - which is to change the source code for the funciton to
> turn
> > it into a no-op when a system property is set, but I'd like to not need
> to
> > redistribute my modified Apache source code.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> > Michael McIntosh
> > Java and Web Services Security Group
> > Security, Privacy, and Extensible Technologies Department
> > IBM Research
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://r-bg.com
>



-- 
http://r-bg.com

Mime
View raw message