- From: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:51:33 -0400
- To: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Cc: XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Here is an updated proposal to revise the requirements [1] for prefix normalization, taking into account xsi:type: (1) Change the section titled "Relax certain guarantees" as follows: Change section title to "Enable optional prefix rewriting" and change the text: "A limited revised version of Canonical XML might be one in which namespace prefixes are not guaranteed to be preserved, possibly breaking the meaning of QNames." to "Canonical XML should support the option of namespace prefix re- writing, optionally including rewriting within xsi:type attributes as well. In the case of prefix rewriting namespace prefixes are not guaranteed to be preserved, possibly breaking the meaning of QNames. The advantage of using prefix rewriting is to avoid the complexity and confusion with prefixes used for different namespaces in different subtrees. This avoids mapping issues and the need for an implementation to store additional information for each node. When the prefix rewriting option is used, the xsi:type attribute may also have prefix rewriting as well. " In section 4.4, "The Canonicalization Element" change #5 from "5 preservePrefixes whether the prefix name is significant. When there are QNames in content, prefixes are probably significant, otherwise they could be expanded out into URIs or converted into n1. n2, n3 etc" to "5 preservePrefixes whether the prefix name is significant. When there are QNames in content, prefixes are probably significant, otherwise they could be expanded out into URIs or converted into n1. n2, n3 etc. Prefixes in xsi:type attribute values can also be rewritten when prefix rewriting is performed if the xsiTypeAware option is set." This should close ACTION-402. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/transform-note/Overview.html On Oct 19, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote: > In my absence I received an action (ACTION-402) to update the > requirements document for ISSUE-136. > > ISSUE-136 states: "Is normalization of prefixes a goal for 2.0 c14n" > > The 2.0 proposal supports normalization of prefixes as an option, see > the prefixRewrite parameter described in the Canonical XML Version 2.0 > editors draft > > http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/c14n-20/#Canonicalization-Parameters > > That document also lists requirements, specifically: > [[ > > 1.4.3 Robustness > > Whitespace handling was a common cause of signature breakages. XML > libraries allow one to "pretty print" an XML document, and most people > wrongly assume that the white space introduced by pretty printing will > be removed by canonicalization but that is not the case. This > specification adds three techniques to improve robustness: > > • Remove leading and trailing whitespace from text nodes, > • Allow for QNames in content especially in the xsi:type attribute, > • Rewrite prefixes > ]] > > To complete ACTION-402, I suggest the following requirements document > changes to the XML Signature Transform Simplification: Requirements > document > > http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/transform-note/Overview.html#id83777 > > (1) Change the section titled "Relax certain guarantees" as follows: > > Change section title to "Enable optional prefix rewriting " > Change > > "A limited revised version of Canonical XML might be one in which > namespace prefixes are not guaranteed to be preserved, possibly > breaking the meaning of QNames." > to > > "Canonical XML should support the option of namespace prefix re- > writing. In this case namespace prefixes are not guaranteed to be > preserved, possibly breaking the meaning of QNames. The advantage of > using this option is avoiding the complexity and confusion of prefixes > that are used for different namespaces in different subtrees, avoiding > mapping issues and the need to store additional information for each > node for this mapping." > > > > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch > Nokia > > >
Received on Friday, 23 October 2009 17:52:26 UTC