- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 20:44:13 -0400
- To: "Gregor Karlinger" <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>, Ed Simon <ed.simon@entrust.com>
- Cc: "XML" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 15:18 4/2/2001 +0200, Gregor Karlinger wrote:
>I think there is an error in the current ([1],[2]) Schema definition for
>the Transform element, to be more precisely, the problem is with
>the type defintion of the XSLT child:
>
> <element name="XSLT" type="string"/>
Yes, this is an error/compromise. I guess what we really want is a complex
type with another any.
<element name="Transform" type="ds:TransformType"/>
<complexType name="TransformType" mixed="true">
<choice maxOccurs="unbounded">
<any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>
<element name="XSLT" type="ds:XSLTType"/>
<element name="XPath" type="string"/>
</choice>
<attribute name="Algorithm" type="anyURI" use="required"/>
</complexType>
<element name="XSLT" type="ds:XSLTType"/>
<complexType name="XSLTType">
<any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>
</complexType>
Which is really rather silly, as someone could stick in a stylesheet element
directly under Transform. I believe this was in here originally just to show
people they could stick an XSLT in here and Ed wanted to limit people to
"stylesheet" (instead of "transform"), but we can't prevent that anyway.
Ed, mind if we get rid of the XSLT element now?
__
Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature
W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Monday, 2 April 2001 20:44:26 UTC