- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 15:46:40 -0500
- To: Gregor.Karlinger@iaik.at
- Cc: David Solo <dsolo@alum.mit.edu>, Donald Eastlake <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, XML-Signature <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Gregor,
Good catch. But why did you exclude the option of letting the content be
mixed? In Boyer's examples of Transforms, the content model of the Transform
document is obviously not an element.
<Transform Algorithm="&XPath;">
descendant-or-self::node()[not(self::Id)]</Transform>
</Transforms>
Consequently, I've changed the content model to mixed for the time being.
At 14:44 99/12/20 +0100, Gregor Karlinger wrote:
>Section "3.3.3.1 The Transforms Element":
>-----------------------------------------
>
>In this section there is no hint (neither in the textual description nor
in the
>Schema definition) that the "Transform" element could have mixed content.
But
>in section 5.6 the specification defines some character content for the
"Transform"
>element.
>
>To solve this contradiction, I suggest the following:
>
>* Keep the content model as-is (content='elementOnly')
>
>* Put the stuff defined in section 5.6 into a parameter element (for
example the
> XPath language expression).
_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.
Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Wednesday, 12 January 2000 16:03:22 UTC