W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2000

RE: Make it easy to create signable schemas (was: Re: XML Signature WG's review of XML Schema)

From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 11:49:02 +0900
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20000514114408.03009a50@sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>
To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com>, "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>, "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, <cmsmcq@w3.org>
At 00/05/12 09:42 -0700, John Boyer wrote:
><martin>
>Not necessarily, but that may well happen. We already see
>in the DSig group that people want to use the DOM, and
>don't want to keep around e.g. whether an attribute was
>single-quoted or double-quoted. As we move up the semantic
>ladder (well, it feels more like a very flat slope, but
>that's a different issue), exactly the same will very
>easily happen one step higher.
></martin>
>
><john>
>Actually, I'm pretty sure we would argue that if you want to schema
>normalize an XML document, then you would need another transform for that.

Hello John,

Can you give some examples for what you mean by 'schema normalize',
i.e. a short document before and after normalization, or so?

What I'm saying is that with some rather minor tweaks to the current
Schema drafts, it will be possible to easily write Schemata that will
make sure that documents that validate against these Schemata will
already be normalized and won't need any normalzation on the schema
level anymore.

>Whether we define such a transform in this version of the spec is a decision
>of the chairs.

How could such a transformation look?


>John Boyer
>Software Development Manager
>PureEdge Solutions Inc. (formerly UWI.Com)
>Creating Binding E-Commerce
>jboyer@PureEdge.com
></john>


Regards,   Martin.
Received on Sunday, 14 May 2000 08:22:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:09 GMT