- From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:20:57 +0100
- To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
r/reagle@w3.org/2000.07.18/16:28:39 >At 19:30 7/18/00 +0100, Merlin Hughes wrote: > >The Schema has mandatory content for the Type element. This > >seems wrong because it can't then be implemented interoperably > >without further specification. > >Are you suggestion it be change to optional? > > <element name='Type'> > <complexType content='mixed'> > <any namespace='##other' minOccurs='0' maxOccurs='unbounded'/> > ... Something of that nature. RetrievalMethod simply seems underspecified given that it "SHOULD" be implemented. By making some of those parts optional, it could be read as minimally and sufficiently specified. For example, it seems reasonable to present a RetrievalMethod with the Location: ldap://ldap.baltimore.ie/CN=merlin?userCertificate;binary What, in this case, do I specify as the Method and Type, both of which are currently mandatory? By making Method and Type optional I can, at the very least, assume that the recipient will determine the type of key information from the URI. Merlin
Received on Tuesday, 18 July 2000 18:21:23 UTC