W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > July 2010

Re: ACTION-549: Proposal for QName handling in C14N 2.0

From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:39:07 +0200
To: <cantor.2@osu.edu>
CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C16BCD11-7874-4AC9-88D7-0D1A78AE8F85@nokia.com>
Thanks for this proposal Scott.

I have two questions.

(1) 

> In section 2.3, the text on Text Nodes would be modified by adding:
> 
> "If the prefix rewriting parameter is set, and if the parent element node is
> among those enumerated for the qnameAware option, then the QName or CURIE
> value of the attribute is rewritten with the new prefix."

Should "value of the attribute is rewritten with the new prefix." be revised to say:

 "value of any QName  text content listed in the enumerated qnameAware option is rewritten with the new prefix."


(2)  Examples of the qnameAware option would be helpful, especially in the text node case.

If this approach were used for example 2.5.3 ( http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/c14n-20/#sec-ExcCanonicalization-Example )

then would the qnameAware option contain the value "wsu:Id"?

if a:b text within the element foo:bar  were to be processed, would qnameAware option contain "foo:bar, a: b"?

<something xmlns:foo="http://www.example.com/foo" xmlns:a="http://www.example.com/a">
 <foo:bar>
a:b
 </foo:bar>
</something>

Thanks

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Jul 16, 2010, at 6:11 PM, ext Scott Cantor wrote:

> I propose the following changes to C14N 2.0 based on the June 22 Editor's
> Draft.
> 
> These changes don't include the actual syntax of the proposed option,
> because that's the domain of XML Signature. Pratik, is the material on
> specifying c14n 2.0 options in the CanonicalizationMethod element in place
> yet? I didn't see it at first glance.
> 
> -- Scott
> 
> In section 2.2, replace the xsiTypeAware option in the table with a more
> general option:
> 
> ===============
> qnameAware
> 
> an enumeration of qualified element names, qualified attribute names, and
> unqualified attribute names (identified by name, and parent qualified name)
> 
> set of nodes whose entire content must be processed as QName-valued or
> CURIE-valued for the purposes of canonicalization, including prefix
> rewriting and recognition of prefix "visible utilization"
> 
> default is empty set
> ===============
> 
> Below the table, the references to xsiTypeAware would be altered to the new
> option name.
> 
> In section 2.3, the text on Attribute Nodes would be modified:
> 
> "Also with prefix rewriting enabled, the attribute content is treated
> specially if the attribute is among those enumerated for the qnameAware
> option. If so, the QName or CURIE value of the attribute is rewritten with
> the new prefix."
> 
> 
> In section 2.3, the text on Text Nodes would be modified by adding:
> 
> "If the prefix rewriting parameter is set, and if the parent element node is
> among those enumerated for the qnameAware option, then the QName or CURIE
> value of the attribute is rewritten with the new prefix."
> 
> In section 2.5, the "Visibly Utilized" section would be replaced with:
> 
> ==================
> This concept is required for exclusive canonicalization. An element E  in
> the document subset visibly utilizes a namespace declaration, i.e. a
> namespace prefix P and bound value V, if any of the following conditions are
> true:
> 
>    * The element E itself has a qualified name that uses the prefix P.
> (Note if an element does not have a prefix, that means it visibily utilizes
> the default namespace.)
>    * OR The element E is among those enumerated for the qnameAware option,
> and the QName or CURIE value of the element uses the prefix P (or, lacking a
> prefix, it visibly utilizes the default namespace)
>    * OR An attribute A of that element has a qualified name that uses the
> prefix P, and that attribute is not in the exclusion list. (Note: unlike
> elements, if an attribute doesn't have a prefix, that means it is a locally
> scoped attribute. It does NOT mean that the attribute visibily utilizes the
> default namespace.)
>    * OR An attribute A of that element is among those enumerated for the
> qnameAware option, and the QName or CURIE value of the attribute uses the
> prefix P (or, lacking a prefix, it visibly utilizes the default namespace)
>    * OR (TBD) Some special attribute or text nodes maybe have an XPath,
> e.g. the IncludedXPath and ExcludedXPath attributes in an XML Signature 2.0
> Transform. Any prefixes used in this XPath expression are considered to be
> visibility utilized.
> =================
> 
> In section 2.6, replace the last bullet with:
> 
> "If the prefixRewrite option is set to other than "none", modify the QNames
> for the attribute name to use the new prefixes. Also, if the attribute is
> among those enumerated for the qnameAware option, then change its QName or
> CURIE value to use the new prefix."
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2010 18:39:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 July 2010 18:39:53 GMT