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 > [email protected] > http://www.aleksey.com/mailman/listinfo/xmlsec > _______________________________________________ xmlsec mailing list [email protected] http://www.aleksey.com/mailman/listinfo/xmlsec
