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

RE: Latest version of the Infoset

From: John Boyer <JBoyer@PureEdge.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 13:09:17 -0800
Message-ID: <7874BFCCD289A645B5CE3935769F0B520C3377@tigger.PureEdge.com>
To: "Philippe Le Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>, <www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Hi Philippe,

Thanks a lot for pointing that out.  My comments about the utility of
start and end entity markers were made only 2 days before the newest
draft came out.

It looks like they've decide to address our concern about the base URI
of PIs in external entities by saying simply "It can't be done!" (which
is essentially the same thing I said in the C14N Rec due to the same
limitations in the earlier xpath data model).

I am glad that they've spelled it out so well in the infoset document
because at least it sets a clear precedent about not using relative URIs
in PIs that appear in external entities (however inconvenient that might
be to some people).

However, it is sort of unfortunate that obviously recoverable
information is being lost, esp. when we can point to *real* places where
the information can be put to good use.

Editors:  Is there some reason why entity ref (and cdata) markers got
yanked?  I can understand tweaking features in response to a last call,
but it seems uncommon to make such a substantive change without issuing
another last call. 

John Boyer
Senior Product Architect, Software Development
Internet Commerce System (ICS) Team
PureEdge Solutions Inc. 
Trusted Digital Relationships
v: 250-708-8047  f: 250-708-8010
1-888-517-2675   http://www.PureEdge.com <http://www.pureedge.com/>  	
 	


-----Original Message-----
From: Philippe Le Hegaret [mailto:plh@w3.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 4:20 PM
To: John Boyer
Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Subject: Latest version of the Infoset


John,

Joseph pointed me to the XML-DSig WG comments and it seems
that  you're not aware of the latest changes in the
Infoset

From
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2001JanMar/att-0149
/00-part

> Information Set provides for Entity and CDATA start and end mark
information
> items.

This is no longer true. Entity and CDATA start and end mark information
items
were removed from the latest of the Infoset:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xml-infoset-20010316

> Yes.  Suppose I have an external entity of the following form:
> <?PI1?> <e> <?PI2?> </e> <?PI3?>
> such that substitution into a document of the form
> <doc> &extEnt; <?PI4?> </doc>
> becomes
> <doc><?PI1?> <e> <?PI2?> </e> <?PI3?> <?PI4?> </doc>
> I want to retain the original meaning of element 'e' as well as PI1,
PI2 and PI3. 
> One way to do this is to add an xml:base attribute that preserves the
base URI
> of the external entity in the replacement text.  Problem is, since
xml:base is
> an attribute, it will cover PI2 by adding it to 'e', but it will not
cover PI1
> and PI3, which therefore experience a change in meaning when
sustituted into
> the document if they use the base URI *and* if the document has a
different
> base URI than the external entity (which is quite reasonable).
> If I knew the start and end of the external entity substitution text,
as well
> as its base URI, I could do something like the following:
> <doc><c14n:baseURI xmlns:c14n="..." xml:base="refer to extEnt"><?PI1?>
<e> <?PI2?> </e> <?PI3?></c14n:baseURI> <?PI4?> </doc>
> The resulting XML may not be directly usable since the addition of
such an element
> has made 'e' the grandchild of doc, where it used to be the child, so
embedded
> self-referential XPaths may fail.  However, this technique is useful
for signatures
> since it generates an XML string that is 1) easily seen to mean the
same thing as
> the source document because it is XML, and 2) is different based on
whether a PI
> like PI3 or PI4 are in the external entity or in the main document.

The Infoset does no longer preserve the base URI of PIs if you serialize
the
document:
[[[
2.4. Processing Instruction Information Items
[...]
[base URI] The base URI of the PI, as computed by the method of XML Base
[XML
Base]. If the PI appears directly in the document entity, and the URI of
the
document entity is not known, and there is no xml:base declaration in
effect,
then the value of this property is unknown. Note that if an infoset is
serialized as an XML document, it will not be possible to preserve the
base URI
of any PI that originally appeared at the top level of an external
entity,
since there is no syntax for PIs corresponding to the xml:base attribute
on
elements.
]]]

-- XML Information Set
http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xml-infoset-20010316/#infoitem.pi
Fri, 16 Mar 2001 22:42:59 GMT

In your case, one solution would be to encapsulate each PI in a
c14n:baseURI
element:
<doc><c14n:baseURI xmlns:c14n="..." xml:base="refer to
extEnt"><?PI1?></c14:baseURI> <e> <?PI2?> </e> <c14n:baseURI
xmlns:c14n="..."
xml:base="refer to extEnt"><?PI3?></c14n:baseURI> <?PI4?> </doc>

Regards,
Philippe
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2001 16:09:51 GMT

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