Comments on XML Signature Streaming Profile of XPath 1.0

Comments on latest editors draft of "XML Signature Streaming Profile of XPath 1.0"

http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-xpath/

Mark sections 1, 2 , 3, 5 as informative (ReSpec , <section ...  class="informative">)

Section 1, next to last paragraph, s/It consists of/It consists of a/

Last paragraph, replace "high performance" with "reasonable performance".

Section 2,  item 2, fix StAX reference to link properly.

Section 3, s/XML signature/XML Signature

Section 2.1 is non-normative, so replace SHOULD with "should".

Section 3, formatting of xml: attribute

Section 3, second bullet, "This XPath profile should include some of the known usages of XPath in XML Signatures"
add a note as to how this is done or where to look in the document for more detail. Move period after [HRMC] reference handle.

Section 4

Is the grammar able to capture the constraint, "There is a slight difference between IncludedXPath and ExcludedXPath, ExcludedXpath can select attributes and element, whereas IncludedXPath can only select elements." Currently it does not appear to.

For (28) ExprToken, the comment says "unchanged except for the Node Test" but there is nothing in the diff for item 28, is the comment in the right place or is the diff incorrect?

(38) NodeType has no definition any more, all right hand sides removed. Should the definition be removed? What is the implication for FunctionName (35), ExprToken (28)?

Section 5, id() function is included in profile, so suggest adding example, e.g. allowed: //*[id=('i1')]  , "elements that have ID, whose value is "i1". to balance the case where id() is listed as expression not  in profile. 

Clarify that section 6 is informative and not prescriptive.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia

Received on Sunday, 31 October 2010 18:22:21 UTC