- From: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
- Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 05:03:35 +0900
- To: "public-xmlsec@w3.org" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
My mistake. Let me write what I wrote. If the schema for Encryption 1.1 does not normatively reference the schema for Signature 1.1, validity of this subtree against the schema for Signature 1.1 is not required. Validators are required to validate this subtree only when validity against both the schema for Signature 1.1 and the schema for Encryption 1.1 is checked. Is this really your intention? Does this make sense? Regards, Makoto 2011/9/4 Cantor, Scott <cantor.2@osu.edu>: > On 9/2/11 11:16 PM, "MURATA Makoto" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote: > >>Dear colleagues, >> >>I still do not understand. The revised gh-example.xml still contains >><dsig11:ECKeyValue>...</dsig11:ECKeyValue>. >> >>If Encryption 1.1 does not normatively reference Signature 1.1, >>conformant implementations are not required to handle this subtree >>as specified in Signature 1.1. > > This: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-xmlenc-core1-20110303/ > > includes a normative reference to XML Signature 1.1. So what are you > looking at? > > -- Scott > > -- Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake Makoto
Received on Saturday, 3 September 2011 20:04:03 UTC