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

RE: Last call comment on XML Sig 1.1 schema

From: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:15:14 -0400
To: "'Magnus Nystrom'" <mnystrom@microsoft.com>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <03ac01cb0c17$71cea3e0$556beba0$@osu.edu>
> Actually I would like for us not to change the schema here; the reason is
> that for the other usages of CryptoBinary related to ECC that you mention,
> the underlying value is just a simple type: An octet string or a seed
> etc. Here, we have an in-built structure and having an abstraction makes
> sense.

I'm not sure I understand that claim. If the type is a CryptoBinary, it has
no structure as far as the schema knows, and it couldn't be changed later to
have a different content model without breaking implementations.

If you're trying to say that the internals of the CrytoBinary data are
structured in some way, I would suggest using an annotation or somethng like
that. There's not much else you can do with the schema.

-- Scott
Received on Monday, 14 June 2010 23:15:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:14 UTC