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

Re:RE: Locations but not Transforms as hints

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 14:30:22 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991124143022.00aea100@localhost>
To: "Chris Smithies" <Chris_Smithies@penop.com>
Cc: rhimes@nmcourt.fed.us, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
At 18:46 99/11/24 +0000, Chris Smithies wrote:
 >Why, when no other kind of electronic signature is invalidated by changing
 >the document's location, should XML signatures be any different?

The argument is:
1. It is not a location; it is a URI.
2. Is is merely a collection of bits, which represent a syntax, which we
define the meaning of! If we don't define it to be a location that MUST be
dereferenced every time a signature is checked, then it isn't!

I define the syntax to mean:
a. There is a set of XML documents that when transformed yield DigestContent
(the content that is finally digested.)
b. At some point in time, the XML document obtained by dereferencing this
URI was just such a document.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure I've expressed it well, and any sort of
exposition on this topic seems to readily confuse people.

_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 1999 14:30:27 GMT

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