W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 1999

RE: comments on 990806 Requirements Doc

From: Richard D. Brown <rdbrown@Globeset.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:27:19 -0500
To: "'John Boyer'" <jboyer@uwi.com>, "'Joseph M. Reagle Jr.'" <reagle@w3.org>, <dee3@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "'IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01b001bee985$c7d2dd80$0bc0010a@artemis.globeset.com>
Joseph, john,

>
> <John> For example, having the signature directly sign the data by
> enveloping the data inside of the manifest. </John>
>

This is an option that I have promoted since Boston meeting. Interesting
enough, it looks pretty much like an RDF second basic abbreviation syntax.

Before Simplification
---------------------
<Element id='signed-data'>
  ...
</Element>

<Signature>
  ...
  <Resource>
    <Locator href='signed-data'>
  </Resource>
  ...
</Signature>

After Simplification
--------------------
<Signature>
  ...
  <Resource>
    <Element id='signed-data'>
      ...
    </Element>
  </Resource>
  ...
</Signature>

ATTENTION: JUST FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES...

Establishing a parallel with RDF simplification might give us a solution to
the problem raised by canonicalization of an embedded resource value (see
previous email with David Solo). I have to think over that a bit more...

Richard D. Brown
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 1999 10:27:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:07 GMT