W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: Test Case with xml-dsig

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 13:11:35 -0500
To: Gabe Wachob <gwachob@wachob.com>
Cc: public-xml-id@w3.org, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-Id: <200502051311.35669.reagle@mit.edu>

On Thursday 13 January 2005 14:47, Gabe Wachob wrote:
> DanC asked me to email this URL as a good example of a use of xml:id with
> xml Dsig's Reference element/URI attribute when used with URI fragment
> identifier (i.e. for references to XML elements being signed inside an
> XML document).

Yes, many years ago we spoke of something like this being useful, and 
wondered if, absent such an attribute in the XML namespace, should create 
our own ID attribute in our own namespace? however, if someone is defining 
their own namespace and wants a convenient attribute for identification 
purposes, they could just as well define their own in their application 
context, rather than relying upon one from the digital signature context. 
(Though, if it caught on and appeared in many applications, maybe it would 
be useful for digital signature processors to easily recognize.) The real 
usefulness, would be in retrofitting other namespace applications that were 
designed before or without knowledge of digital signatures. Yet, if you do 
do that, which seems to be the proposal, one encounters a number of 
problems with respect to versioning of XML. For example, is the 
canonicalization of xml:ID correct when used with the existing 
specifications? What happens to the info set?
Received on Saturday, 5 February 2005 18:11:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:40 UTC