AW: KeyInfo (Was: Urgent: W3C Guidlines on Namespace structure)

Joseph,

I do not think that the choice model you suggest, has so many benefits
that a change of the current schema is justified:

o You argue, that you can maintain a defined sequence of the certain
  types of children within KeyInfo. But this is only true, as long as
  there are used only the predefined types of XML-Signature. The sequence
  cannot be maintained any more if there are more than two newly defined
  types are used:

  <KeyInfo>
     <NewFoo1/>
     <NewFoo2/>
     <NewFoo1/>
     <NewFoo2/>
  <KeyInfo>

  This example is validating with your new schema proposal.

o As Merlin argues, it would be sufficient to semantically restrict the
  number of occurences for KeyValue to a maximum of one; this would increase
  the number of possibilities for reuse of the KeyInfo type by other parties.

Regards, Gregor
---------------------------------------------------------------
DI Gregor Karlinger
mailto:gregor.karlinger@iaik.at
http://www.iaik.at
Phone +43 316 873 5541
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications
Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------
 

> -----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. [mailto:reagle@w3.org]
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Marz 2001 15:08
> An: Gregor Karlinger
> Betreff: btw: KeyInfo (Was: Urgent: W3C Guidlines on Namespace
> structure)
> 
> 
> How did you feel about changing KeyInfo to sequence instead of choice?
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2001JanMar/0124.html
> 
> 
> __
> 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 Thursday, 15 March 2001 15:51:05 UTC