- From: Ed Simon <edsimon@xmlsec.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:56:24 -0400
- To: XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
I've reviewed the RELAX NG schemas supplied by Makoto and I see no obvious issues with the schemas themselves. The challenge, as mentioned by Scott earlier, is that x(XML Schema) < x(RELAX NG) < x(XML Signature specification) where x() is the capability for exactness as to what the format should be. Ideally, it would be nice if one could just derive the RELAX NG schema from the XML Schema but because the exactness of XML Schema is less than RELAX NG, there is the hindrance that the result will not be as exacting wrt closeness to the actual prose specification as it could be. I haven't gone into a full scale comparison of Makoto's schemas and the XML Signature specification (and I don't have time to) but I am certainly glad to see Makoto's work. Indeed, I would suggest that ideally (if I had the time, which I don't) it might be a good idea, noting the greater exactness of RELAX NG, to specify, non-normatively, the XML Signature schema in RELAX NG and use that to automatically derive the normative XML Schema. Thanks Makoto for your work in this. I'm particularly interested in it because of other work I've done in XML Signature sub-classing and RELAX NG (and also OPC). Please keep us informed. Btw, would it be possible to supply the XML, rather than the compact, version of the RELAX NG schemas in future updates? Ed
Received on Wednesday, 21 October 2009 19:56:59 UTC