W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-encryption@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Decryption transform interop samples

From: Takeshi Imamura <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 12:02:30 +0900
To: reagle@w3.org
Cc: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>, xml-encryption@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF463A5ACD.EBEA96BB-ON49256C35.000B951D@LocalDomain>


Joseph,

>>Though I didn't try the ones using XPointer because
>> I didn't support it, I succeeded in the others.
>
>I presume this means the following two cases, but all others pass? (Also,
>you would not be able to validate the signature used in the example of
>section 3.3?)

Yes.

>> I'm inclined to stick with what we have: Our processing
>> basically mirrors xmldsig (some customers do indeed need
>> XPointers), and we leave implementors the option of going
>> to great lengths to dereference XPointers into replacement
>> node sets if they want.
>
>I'm going to agree. The implementation requirement is to ensure the text
is
>well written and to show some evidence of support for the feature. I can't

>forsee any interop problems arising from this (we're just borrowing from
>xmldsig) and the fact that there were enough (optional) full XPointers
>implementations in xmldsig is more relevant to whether we include them
here
>than whether we get more implementations in the XENC WG.

I agree.  I don't see any problems of supporting full XPointers according
to the result from XMLDSIG.  I don't have any plan to support them for now,
though...

>> In XMLDSIG, the URI #foo is always evaluated in the context of
>> the signature document.
>
>What is confusing me here is the term "signature document". Do we mean the

>document identified by the Reference URI? Or the document that the
>signature occurs in?

To my understanding, the term means the latter, i.e., the document
containing the Signature element concerned.

Thanks,
Takeshi IMAMURA
Tokyo Research Laboratory
IBM Research
imamu@jp.ibm.com
Received on Saturday, 14 September 2002 23:10:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:21 GMT