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

Re: Namespaces and URNs

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 11:05:48 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991109110548.00a36520@localhost>
To: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Note, I've moved part of the thread to the XML Signature WG, one other
orthogonal question:

>So not only is it OK to
>declare CanonicalizationMethod/Algorithm as a URI, it's OK for
>SignatureMethod/Algorithm and DigestMethod/Algorithm as well.

Is it possible to have a attribute declaration be of one or more types? (In
an outdated section) the spec forbids:

        Constraint on Schemas: Attribute Locally Unique 
        The same full name must not appear more than once in any 
        archetypeSpec's attribute declaration set. 


http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#section-Types,-Elements-and-Attributes-*

but is there some other way to achieve:

        <attribute name='Location' type='uri' type='idref'>

At 15:31 99/11/09 +0000, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
 >"Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> writes:
 >> I've thought about (and John Boyer propsed yesterday) using Internal
 >> (General) Entities to alleviate the URI glut in the W3C's "first class
 >> object" paradigm. Bray actually gives this as a possible use:
 >> 
 >>         In URLs; many XML documents contain lots of URLs; as we all
 >>         know, URLs tend to move around and are painfully difficult
 >>         to maintain. It > is really useful to use entities to help
 >>         make this easier: <a href='&home;/bin/wr.pl'>.
 >> 
 >>         http://www.xml.com/axml/notes/IntEntsAreMacros.html
 >> 
 >> Consequently, I could have a signature that looks like:
 >> 
 >> <Signature xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/10/signature-core"> 
 >>   <SignedInfo> 
 >>     <!ENTITY c14n "http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/xml-c14n">
 >>     <!ENTITY dsig "http://www.w3.org/1999/dsig-core"
 >>     <CanonicalizationMethod Algorithm="&c14n;"/> 
 >>     <SignatureMethod Algorithm="&dsig;/dsaWithSHA-1"/> 
 >>     <ObjectReference Location="http://www.ietf.org"> 
 >>       <DigestMethod Algorithm="&dsig;/sha1"/> 
 >>       <DigestValue encoding="&dsig;/base64">a23bcd43</DigestValue> 
 >>     </ObjectReference> 
 >>   </SignedInfo> 
 >>   <SignatureValue encoding="&dsig;/base64">dd2323dd</SignatureValue> 
 >> </Signature> 
 >> 
 >> I assume if we do this is it still possible to declare the value of
 >> Algorithm as a URI? Or for instance, if you have a general internal
entity
 >> that expands to an integer, is the following XML valid:
 >> 
 >>         <!ENTITY favoritenumber "8">
 >>         <integer>&favoritenumber;</integer>
 >> 
 >> under the following schema constraint:
 >> 
 >>         <element name="integer" type="integer">
 >
 >Absolutely -- XML Schema schemas validate infosets, and general entity
 >processing is long-since completed before we ever see the element and
 >attribute information items involved above.  So not only is it OK to
 >declare CanonicalizationMethod/Algorithm as a URI, it's OK for
 >SignatureMethod/Algorithm and DigestMethod/Algorithm as well.
 >
 >I guess in conjunction with this issue, I'd recommend you look at the
 >XSLT element extension method [1] as well.
 >
 >ht
 >
 >[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-xslt-19991008#extension-element
 >-- 
 >  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of
Edinburgh
 >     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
 >	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
 >		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 >

_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 1999 11:09:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:08 GMT