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

Re: namespace question

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:28:16 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Kevin Regan <kevinr@valicert.com>
Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
At 12:07 7/12/00 -0700, Kevin Regan wrote:
 >My question is, when canonicalizing the Signature element
 >to compute the SignatureValue, is it necessary to include
 >the namespace declarations of the parents of the Signature
 >element.  If so, it is necessary to know where in the enclosing
 >XML document that the newly generated signature will be inserted.

Ah... yes, if you want the signature to validate, it must be in the same
ancestors that the signature was first in. I was thinking that carrying
forward old context would make the Signature a bit more transportable, but
if the C14N Signature includes ALL namespace nodes of any ancestors
regardless of whether they are used, then there will be nodes that weren't
in the original.

Now that I understand the question, good question. Obviously, we'll have to
see what Boyer says when he returns from holiday, but I suppose you would
only want the ancestor nodes upon which a child of the Signature was
dependent on ...

Joseph Reagle Jr.   
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2000 15:29:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:34 UTC