- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:05:30 -0500
- To: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
At 14:49 1/30/2001 +0900, TAMURA Kent wrote: >Ok, I have understood the resultant octet stream represents a >FooData element. > >Must the result strictly match to the `element' production? >(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#NT-element) > >In my opinion, the result should match to the `document', >http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#NT-document, because we can reuse >normal parsing method of existing XML parser. Given the productions: [1] document ::= prolog element Misc* [39] element ::= EmptyElemTag | STag content ETag The difference between the document and element is that a document might have Misc, and it will have a prolog (but the prolog itself has optional symbols), so how different is the processing? Actually, my original statement was wrong, the referent of the RetrievalMethod will be a document *or* element, and the reason I conclude this is the same as for Reference: one might have an XPath expression that identifies a node (where I identify a particular key structure in another XML document) that then must be serialized; or it might be a URI without a fragment that identifies a document. (Though we recommend against fragments in Reference URIs, and encourage them to be placed in Transforms in section 4.3.3.2) Now, I'm just reading the spec to the best of my ability, I'm not necessarily arguing for what I conclude, so if you think it should be something else, please say so! __ 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/
Received on Tuesday, 30 January 2001 09:05:39 UTC