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

Re: Separate namespace for KeyInfo?

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 11:11:00 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Malte Borcherding <Malte.Borcherding@brokat.com>
Cc: Ed Simon <ed.simon@entrust.com>, IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 02:19 PM 3/2/00 +0100, Malte Borcherding wrote:
 >In my opinion, this buys a clearly structured repository of references to
 >cryptographic algorithms and structures. It simplifies re-use of
 >since you know where to look if you want to include a reference to an
 >in your self-defined XML document.

I still don't understand (please show me an example of what this provides
above/beyond my example). If you and/or Ed are advocating a DTD module based
construction [1], I would advise against that: XHTML did it because they
started well before schemas. If you are advocating a composed schema [2]
based on specific namespaces, I think that would be interesting, but a bit
too advanced for my tastes at this moment. (And -- obviously -- I'm not sure
what having a separate namespace without either of these things actually

 >Speaking of re-use, has there been any discussion in the past about
 >some sort of reference to well-known OIDs for cryptographic algorithms?
I believe the general feeling has been to avoid OIDs (and related

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xhtml-building-20000105/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#composition

<schema targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/2000/02/xmldsig#" 

   <import namespace="http://www.w3.org/2000/02/xmldsig/Core#"

   <import namespace="http://www.w3.org/2000/02/xmldsig/KeyInfo#"


Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2000 11:11:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:33 UTC