RE: Canonical XML comment (attributes in xml namespace)

Hi Gregor,

The result should be [3].  The duplicated attribute in this case doesn't
hurt anything, and therefore seemed superior to defining a more elaborate
set of rules, which would likely include requirement to omit duplicate xml
namespace declarations.

That seemed like a patently bad idea.

John Boyer
Development Team Leader,
Distributed Processing and XML
PureEdge Solutions Inc.
Creating Binding E-Commerce
v: 250-479-8334, ext. 143  f: 250-479-3772
1-888-517-2675 <>

-----Original Message-----
From: Gregor Karlinger []
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 9:42 AM
To: XMLSigWG; John Boyer
Subject: Canonical XML comment (attributes in xml namespace)

Hi John,

I have read section 2.4 about document subsets, and I am wondering
how the propagation for attributes in xml namespace should actually

1. Should the method for processing the attribute axis be enhanced
   only in the case that the parent element is omitted from the
   node set?

2. What happens if an xml attribute (which is in scope for the
   current element) has already been output in the attribute
   axis of an ancestor? Consider the example [1]: The mother
   element is omitted by a fitting XPath expression. So, should
   the c14n output be [2] or [3]?


<grandmother xml:space="preserve">


<grandmother xml:space="preserve">


<grandmother xml:space="preserve">
<child xml:space="preserve">

Regards, Gregor
Gregor Karlinger
Phone +43 316 873 5541
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications

Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2000 15:41:19 UTC