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

Re: Importing 1.0 while normatively referencing 1.1 ( LC-2544) ( LC-2561)

From: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 05:03:35 +0900
Message-ID: <CALvn5EAUcogV1zKS_gRn9AQ5m43DgZ_+uDSpCdnEpNSjovBfrA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-xmlsec@w3.org" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
My mistake.  Let me write what I wrote.

If the schema for Encryption 1.1 does not normatively reference
the schema for Signature 1.1, validity of  this subtree against the
schema for Signature 1.1 is not required.  Validators are required
to validate this subtree only when validity against both the schema
for Signature  1.1 and the schema for Encryption 1.1 is checked.
Is this really your intention?

Does this make sense?

Regards,
Makoto

2011/9/4 Cantor, Scott <cantor.2@osu.edu>:
> On 9/2/11 11:16 PM, "MURATA Makoto" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>
>>Dear colleagues,
>>
>>I still do not understand.  The revised gh-example.xml still contains
>><dsig11:ECKeyValue>...</dsig11:ECKeyValue>.
>>
>>If Encryption 1.1 does not normatively reference Signature 1.1,
>>conformant implementations are not required to handle this subtree
>>as specified in Signature 1.1.
>
> This:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-xmlenc-core1-20110303/
>
> includes a normative reference to XML Signature 1.1. So what are you
> looking at?
>
> -- Scott
>
>



-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto
Received on Saturday, 3 September 2011 20:04:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 3 September 2011 20:04:03 GMT