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

Re: Dereferencing a Reference with no URI attribute

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:36:43 -0500
To: Sean Mullan <sean.mullan@sun.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-Id: <200212061136.43627.reagle@w3.org>

On Friday 06 December 2002 09:51 am, Sean Mullan wrote:
> I have a question about dereferencing (or identifying)
> a Reference without a URI attribute. Section of
> xmldsig-core states, 4th paragraph:
> "If the URI attribute is omitted altogether, the receiving
> application is expected to know the identity of the object".
> Further on, in section, it states:
> "Unless the URI-Reference is a 'same-document' reference as defined
> in [URI, Section 4.2], the result of dereferencing the URI-Reference
> MUST be an octet stream."
> Does the statement above apply to a Reference with no URI
> attribute?

Interesting question, from the text my initial reading is that an "implicit 
same-document reference" is not precluded. If fact, I'd expect this might 
be common in the context of implicit references.

> Can it be represented as either an octet stream or
> a node set? Or, since it is undefined, is it technically NOT a
> same-document reference, and therefore MUST be dereferenced/identified
> as an octet stream?

While an interesting question, is this motivated by an actual example? I'm 
wondering about the interop implications of this. For example, if I had a 
signature with an implicit reference to a node-set, the first transform  
might require a node-set for processing. Is this a problem? I don't see how 
as the other side is already expected to know what the initial object is 
(i.e., node-set).
Received on Friday, 6 December 2002 11:36:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:38 UTC