Re: Clarification on URIs

Hi Joseph,

The reason I asked this was that if 3.a.2 is in fact referring to resources
locators in the manifest, then isn't requirement 3.a.2 redundant
(specifically a subset of requirement 3.a.3)?

Thanks,
John Boyer
Software Development Manager
UWI.Com -- The Internet Forms Company
jboyer@uwi.com
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
    To: John Boyer <jboyer@uwi.com>
    Cc: IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
    Date: Friday, June 11, 1999 1:22 PM
    Subject: Re: Clarification on URIs


    At 12:19 PM 6/11/99 -0700, John Boyer wrote:
    >>>>

        Section 3.a.2 of the requirements says "XML-Signature referants are
URIs. [Reagle]"
        Could you please say more about what you mean there? Are you
referring to the resource locators in the manifest, or something more broad?

    <<<<

    The manifest: you reference the things you are pointing at using the URI
convention. I guess it's a restatement of sorts of Tim's URI Axiom 0a. [1]
We could say something even stronger about the method, like we will use
xlink or whatever. Also, in terms of the principles, I probably will add
something about we prefer decentralized systems over centralized registries.
(Other people are free to oppose it and suggest a counter proposal.)


    [1] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
    Axiom 0a: Universality 2
    Any resource of significance should be given a URI. This means that no
information which has any significance and persistence should be made
available in a way that one cannot refer to it with a URI.


    _________________________________________________________
    Joseph Reagle Jr.
    Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
    XML-DSig Co-Chair http://w3.org/People/Reagle/