W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > April 2011

Re: 2.0 exclusions

From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 21:16:58 +0000
To: <cantor.2@osu.edu>
CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4FCD9ABD-4FD9-4F72-92A3-3C857287536F@nokia.com>
Canonical XML 2.0 states that in the exclusion list, "These attribute nodes should not be namespace declaration or attributes in the xml namespace."

so I guess the sentence should read: "Only regular attributes can be excluded, not attributes that are namespace declarations or in the xml namespace."

agreed?

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Apr 4, 2011, at 3:13 PM, ext Cantor, Scott E. wrote:

> On 4/4/11 3:07 PM, "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com"
> <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote:
>> We have the following statement in the 2.0 requirements:
>> 
>> "Optionally from this set, exclude some subtrees (of element nodes) or
>> exclude some attribute nodes. Can only exclude regular attributes, not
>> attributes that are namespace declarations. TBD if xml: attributes can be
>> excluded"
>> 
>> We are silent on the TBD question in the 2.0 documents.
> 
> The exclusion syntax is XPath, right, so I guess it's a simple question:
> can you articulate xml:lang, xml:id, etc. via XPath?
> 
>> It seems to me that it is application dependent on whether xml attributes
>> can be excluded sensibly and that we remain silent on the subject, and
>> remove "TBD if xml: attributes can be excluded" from the requirements
>> document.
> 
> I think we should just answer the previous question, yea or nay.
> 
> -- Scott
> 
Received on Monday, 4 April 2011 21:17:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 April 2011 21:17:39 GMT