- From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:33:46 +0000
- To: <cantor.2@osu.edu>
- CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
I agree I noted that as well when I looked at it .It is not a schema definition, but an attempt to be helpful. I say we pull this out and rely on the examples as well as showing the new MGF schema. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Jan 16, 2012, at 1:50 PM, ext Cantor, Scott wrote: > On 1/16/12 10:58 AM, "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com" > <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: >> >> Is this what you are saying? > > No, see below. > >> I don't think there is a problem with the xenc 1.1 schema file itself, as >> MGF is defined as a stand-alone type in the xenc11 namespace. Do you see >> a problem with the 1.1 schema file (attached)? > > No, I think the issue is with the way the fragment is laid out inside the > spec. > >> The document also highlights the schema definition in 5.5.2: >> Schema Definition: >> <!-- use these element types as children of EncryptionMethod >> when used with RSA-OAEP --> >> <element name="OAEPparams" minOccurs="0" type="base64Binary"/> >> <element ref="ds:DigestMethod" minOccurs="0"/> >> <element name="MGF" type="xenc11:MGFType"/> > > This isn't really a normative schema, and I think that's the problem here. > It's presented in a questionable way because it's trying to show the > content model that is imposed by the text, but there is no actual schema > enforcing this. And as it stands, it's misrepresenting the MGF and > OAEPparams elements because it's giving them both "names" in the same > default namespace. > > Basically you can't informally present things like this without running > into problems. > > At the very least, it shouldn't be called a "Schema". I'm not sure what > can really be done here, but at a minimum you'd have to maybe split the > schema fragments being presented in the two separate schemas. Personally, > I would just use prose to describe the element content, and then maybe > just show the schema for the new element being defined here, the MGF. > > -- Scott >
Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 20:34:25 UTC