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

[Fwd: 000106 Minutes]

From: Gregor Karlinger <Gregor.Karlinger@iaik.at>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 15:51:53 +0100
Message-ID: <387B4389.93AB5538@iaik.at>
To: ML W3C XML-Signature <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
 

attached mail follows:


"Joseph M. Reagle Jr." wrote:
...
>          1. What to do with IDREF/URI?
>             ACTION Reagle: ask schema WG if URI="#ref" a valid instance
>             of the uri schema type. ACTION Eastlake: Otherwise, leave it
>             as is and add a sentence or two clarifying thte IDREF must be
>             processed like an XPATH.

Section 3.2.10 of [1] states:

  "[Definition:]  uri represents a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Reference as
                  defined in [RFC 2396]."

Furthermore section 4 of [2] states:

  "The term "URI-reference" is used here to denote the common usage of a
   resource identifier.  A URI reference may be absolute or relative,
   and may have additional information attached in the form of a
   fragment identifier."
  ...
  "URI-reference = [ absoluteURI | relativeURI ] [ "#" fragment ]"
  ...

I think these two statements answer the question if "#ref" is a valid
instance of the uri schema type with yes, since the part
"absoluteURI | relativeURI" is optional in the definition of
URI-reference.

I conclude that therefore we should remove the IDREF attribute from the
Reference element.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/
[2] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gregor Karlinger
mailto://gregor.karlinger@iaik.at
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications
Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------



Received on Tuesday, 11 January 2000 09:52:37 GMT

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