W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: RDF C14N Inclusive or Exclusive

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:42:30 -0000
To: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDEECPCDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
> 1. In your email: should we emit a namespace for prefixes found in an
> attribute value (or even element content?!).


My take on that was that the rational intent of exclusive C14N was not to
emit such a namespace.

One reason is simply the difficulty of computing such a fact. If I had used
an XSLT example with attribute values being XPath expressions then precisely
which namespaces are being used there is non-trivial to tell. I suspect if
one wanted to supported XSLT in the full, (including element content) then
the question of which namespace prefixes were being (invisibly) used may
even be Turing complete!

I found the choices made in the two specs on this issue quite
understandable.

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 4 March 2002 10:42:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:14 GMT