- From: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:31:09 -0500 (EST)
- To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
>I think that provided the EPR doesn't contain any QNames (or other
>lexical forms that use namespace declarations) in content then EXCC14N
>is fine.
In particular, exc-c14n with an empty "included prefixes" list.
The caveat ("provided that") can't be treated lightly, since there are
many specs which use qnames in content, including things like xpath, xslt,
and (gee, didn't i try to fix this? :), ws-addressing. we'll need to
explain that unless the comparator has the XSD definition for the EPRs
being compared (or the equivalent out of band information), it is quite
possible to get false negatives, since content of foo:bar and baz:bar can
either be the same or not, depending on whether or not they're known to be
qnames.
/r$
--
Rich Salz Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2005 04:31:13 UTC