Re: RNG schema plans

> I think that the conversation revealed underspecified points. Are
> elements of the namespace "http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" 
> allowed as children of CanonicalizationMethod elements when 
> the value of the Algorithm attribute is neither 
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315",
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#WithComments",
> "http://www.w3.org/2006/12/xml-c14n11", nor 
> "http://www.w3.org/2006/12/xml-c14n11#WithComments"?

What does the schema say? That's your answer. It says ##any, so the answer is yes, they're allowed.

>  I would argue that they should be disallowed, and most XMLers would expect so.

You can't argue with the schema. You can argue the schema is bad, but it is long done and cannot be changed. Speaking to your argument, though, I don't agree. There is no reason to disallow anything when the intent is to have an open content model.

> I would also argue that permissible children are not absolutely 
> clear also when the value of @Algorithm  is one of the four 
> mentioned above.  Are foreign elements allowed as children?

That is the province of each of those algorithms to define. If the algorithm is inclusive, there's no content. If it's exclusive, that spec defines the allowable child element, which happens to be defined in a separate namespace.

> I have similar questions whenever xsd:any is used in the schema.

XSD is explicit on the meaning of wildcards, and the only constraints that exist are specific only to particular algorithm values. As a general matter for extensions, what the schema says is what goes.

-- Scott