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

Re: Questions about c14n implementation

From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 09:15:31 -0400
Message-Id: <200107301315.JAA0000004560@torque.pothole.com>
To: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org

From:  Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
Date:  Mon, 30 Jul 2001 09:26:05 +0200
To:  w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-ID:  <52752887.996485165@clouseau>

>Hi all,
>I have two questions about the Canonical XML Interoperability Report [1]:
>1. What does the following sentence (1. processor requirement) mean: "Use 
>processors that support UTF-8 and UTF-16 and that translate to the UCS 
>character domain".
>Does this mean that canonicalizing UTF16-XML-Files must be possible (and 
>that the result is UTF8) or what does "translation to UCS domain" mean?

I think it's taking the text to text view of canonicalization. In the
first part it is just repeating the requirement in the XML 1.0 
Recommendation that all XML parser must understand UTF-8 and UTF-16
encodings. In the second phrase, it is syaing that if your parser
understands some non-UCS encoding, it must translate that to UCS
code pooints.

>2. Question: How did you check the 3rd processor requirement: 
>"Implementations MUST NOT be implemented with an XML parser that
>converts relative URIs to absolute URIs." . How should a parser (like 
>Xerces) convert a URI? Does a parser understands what a URI is?

Don't know about a parser but a schema verifier would, I think.
If it knows that some attribute value is a URI, who knows what
it might do to it... knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

>[1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/10/10-c14n-interop.html

Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 09:16:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:36 UTC