W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > November 2012

Re: Comment for XML Signature Syntax and Processing Version 1.1 Working Draft 18 October 2012 (re: here() function)

From: Cantor, Scott <cantor.2@osu.edu>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 19:10:47 +0000
To: Sean Mullan <sean.mullan@oracle.com>, "edsimon@xmlsec.com" <edsimon@xmlsec.com>
CC: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>, "public-xmlsec@w3.org" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BA63CEAE152A7742B854C678D949138339AA0D79@CIO-KRC-D1MBX01.osuad.osu.edu>
On 11/2/12 3:02 PM, "Sean Mullan" <sean.mullan@oracle.com> wrote:

>Hmm, I knew this issue looked familiar. I actually reported this as an
>issue way back in 2004 and here was the explanation:
>
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2004JanMar/0057.html
>
>I'm still not sure what the right answer is.

This sentence in the response seems unsupportable in aa typical
implementation, I would think:

"If other functions were available and were used during signing, then
there would be interoperability problems during validation, so no other
functions are allowed in the evaluation context."

That sounds like a dubious constraint to expect to be in place using off
the shelf components. But I'll defer to the experts.

-- Scott
Received on Friday, 2 November 2012 19:11:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 2 November 2012 19:11:28 GMT