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

Re: XMLDSIG Interop in connection with 48th IETF

From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 13:40:29 -0400
Message-Id: <200007191740.NAA09603@torque.pothole.com>
To: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>

Making some of this stuff optional seems reasonable but I would think
that a lot of implementations would just pass off the uri to some
retrieval mechanism without looking inside it and still want a
separate indication of type and encoding.

Donald

From:  merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Message-Id:  <200007182220.XAA10671@bobcat.baltimore.ie>
To:  "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Cc:  "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
In-reply-to:  <3.0.5.32.20000718162839.00ad5e70@localhost> 
Date:  Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:20:57 +0100

>r/reagle@w3.org/2000.07.18/16:28:39
>>At 19:30 7/18/00 +0100, Merlin Hughes wrote:
>> >The Schema has mandatory content for the Type element. This
>> >seems wrong because it can't then be implemented interoperably
>> >without further specification.
>> 
>>Are you suggestion it be change to optional?
>>
>>   <element name='Type'>
>>     <complexType content='mixed'>
>>       <any namespace='##other' minOccurs='0' maxOccurs='unbounded'/>
>>        ...
>
>Something of that nature. RetrievalMethod simply seems
>underspecified given that it "SHOULD" be implemented.
>By making some of those parts optional, it could be
>read as minimally and sufficiently specified.
>
>For example, it seems reasonable to present a RetrievalMethod
>with the Location:
>
>  ldap://ldap.baltimore.ie/CN=merlin?userCertificate;binary
>
>What, in this case, do I specify as the Method and Type,
>both of which are currently mandatory?
>
>By making Method and Type optional I can, at the very least,
>assume that the recipient will determine the type of key
>information from the URI.
>
>Merlin
>
Received on Wednesday, 19 July 2000 13:38:20 GMT

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