[Standards] Privacy lists and the order of items

Remko Tronçon remko at el-tramo.be
Tue May 12 05:43:26 UTC 2009

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
> This did get me wondering about the issue that if there's two semantically
> identical forms for the same information, then should we ever wish to have
> clients sign the privacy list, we have a C14N problem.

Well, semantical equivalence  should be checked at the XML level, not
at the XMPP level. Wouldn't you otherwise have problems with plain
messages as well, since
<message><body>a</body><subject>b</subject></message> is equivalent to
<message><subject>b</subject><body>a</body></message> in XMPP (but not
in XML).


More information about the Standards mailing list