RE: Anonymous types in the DSig Schema

hi Joseph,

> I finally got around to adding "Type" on the end of the complex types and
> representing the changes in the spec [1]. With respect to the "FIXME"s.
>
> 1. Ok, xml declaration is now present.
> 2. 'FIXME, as is, minOccurs/maxOccurs of "choice" or "any" can be
> omitted'.
> Are you saying it's redundant? I'm not sure: what I think we were
> saying is
> you can have 0 or more elements (any 0:unbounded) from 0 or more
> namespaces
> (choice 0:unbounded). I agree with you if we want to say every
> SignatureProperty content should only have elements from a single
> namespace
> -- which makes sense since people can use multiple SignatureProperties.

yes, you are right. i simply missed the namespace issue.

> 3. 'FIXME, HMACOutputLength is not referenced anywhere in this document'
> It can be used in the SignatureMethod which has an open content
> model, but
> to make it clear I changed SignatureMethod to:
>     <complexType name="SignatureMethodType">
>       <choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
>         <element name="HMACOutputLength" type="ds:HMACOutputLengthType"/>
>         <any namespace="##any" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>       </choice>
>       <attribute name="Algorithm" type="uriReference" use="required"/>
>     </complexType>
>

seems to be a good idea.

> Also, to give SignatureValue an ID, it is now:
>     <complexType name="SignatureValueType">
>       <simpleContent>
>         <extension base="ds:CryptoBinary">
>           <attribute name="Id" type="ID" use="optional"/>
>         </extension>
>       </simpleContent>
>     </complexType>
>

this can be quite useful for counter-signatures.

>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/Drafts/xmldsig-core/Overview.html
> File: Overview.html     Status: Up-to-date
>     Working revision:    1.8
>     Repository revision: 1.8
>     Existing Tags:
>          release-schema-typed            (revision: 1.8)
>
>
> At 12:37 11/8/2000 +0100, Karl Scheibelhofer wrote:
> > > Sounds good. Which structures do you want this over? Are you
> looking for
> > > somethign as simple as the following [1]. (BTW: If you just went
> > > ahead and
> > > tweaked the schema appropriately and proposed it (such that any
> > > instance in
> > > the old version is still valid in the new, that'd probably be
> the easiest
> > > way to go).)
> > >
> > > [1] <element name="KeyValue" type="KeyValueType"/>
> > >
> > >    <complexType name="KeyValueType" mixed="true">
> > >      <choice>
> > >        <any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"
> > >         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> > >        <element ref="ds:DSAKeyValue"/>
> > >        <element ref="ds:RSAKeyValue"/>
> > >      </choice>
> > >    </complexType>
> >
> >yes, this is exactly what i meant. this makes it easier for me
> to build my
> >developments on the types defined in XML-Dsig. using named types, i can
> >derive my types from the types defined by XML-Dsig using restriction.
> >
> >i attached a "xmldsig-core-schema" with named types in the style
> you showed
> >in [1]. i inserted some "FIXME" comments, where i think that the original
> >document can be "cleaner".
> >i validated the schema, but i could not test it, because i do not have a
> >parser that understands the new syntax of XML-Schema. but i already used
> >named types with the 20000711 version successfully. it should work.
> >
> >best regards
> >
> >   Karl Scheibelhofer
> >
> >--
> >
> >Karl Scheibelhofer, <mailto:Karl.Scheibelhofer@iaik.at>
> >Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications (IAIK)
> >at Technical University of Graz, Austria, http://www.iaik.at
> >Phone: (+43) (316) 873-5540
> >
> >
>
>
> __
> Joseph Reagle Jr.
> W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
> IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
>
>
>