- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:08:28 -0500
- To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>, stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie, www-xkms@w3.org
On Tuesday 05 March 2002 12:55, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> What we need to do as a minimum is to make the Respond tag
> more descriptive, one option would be to use <Return>, although
> that could be confusing. In SAML we used <RespondWith>.
If folks are more comfortable with RespondWith than Return, that's fine by
me.
> So the request would be something like:
>
> <RegisterRequest>
> ...
> <RespondWith>X509Cert</RespondWith>
> <RespondWith>PrivateKey</RespondWith>
> <RespondWith>PGPKey</RespondWith>
> </RegisterRequest>
I'd want the namespaces though:
<RegisterRequest
xmlns:xenc='http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#'
xmlns:ds='http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#'>
<RespondWith>ds:KeyName</RespondWith>
<RespondWith>xenc:EncryptedKey</RespondWith>
</RegisterRequest>
When you process this bit, you should replace the prefix with the namespace
and operate over the proper QName [1].
(And what does the "Register" part of the RegisterRequeset indicate? That
might confuse folks with registering/submitting a key with a service.)
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#NT-QName
--
Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature/
W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2002 15:08:32 UTC