W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: Schema definition for <Transform>

From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 15:50:26 +0100
To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: Ed Simon <ed.simon@entrust.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010409145026.DE9F243BDA@yog-sothoth.ie.baltimore.com>

I'm in favour of dropping the XSLT element.

Merlin

r/reagle@w3.org/2001.04.05/18:03:35
>
>Gregor (and/or other implementors),
>
>I know the one example you provided that I'm using for interop included the 
>XSLT element. If we remove the XSLT element it will no longer be valid (but 
>Gregor's point is that it isn't valid now as the type for it is defined as 
>string.) Does anyone mind if we drop the element?
>
>At 16:22 4/5/2001 -0400, Ed Simon wrote:
>
>>My preference (see 
>>"<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JulSep/0167.html>h
>ttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JulSep/0167.html") 
>>
>>is to require that the <XSLT> element be defined to contain a full XSLT 
>>stylesheet.  As I recall,
>>we didn't get an answer as to whether this was possible and we gave up 
>>trying.
>>
>>I note that the XML Signature spec only says the content of the <XSLT> 
>>stylesheet element
>>"SHOULD" contain an <xsl:stylesheet> element (I feel "MUST" is the right 
>>word) .  I think
>>allowing vestigial styles sheets is asking for trouble because who knows 
>>how they will be
>>processed.  But given  what the spec says (and I forget the arguments for 
>>it), we can go ahead
>>with dropping the <XSLT> element.
>>
>>Ed
>
>
>__
>Joseph Reagle Jr.                 http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
>W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
>IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/Signature
>W3C XML Encryption Chair          http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
>
>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct,  special,  indirect 
or consequential  damages  arising  from  alteration of  the contents of this
message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on.

In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to
promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or
appearance at trade shows and conferences.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.
   http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Monday, 9 April 2001 10:51:33 GMT

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