- From: Gregor Karlinger <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:27:07 +0200
- To: "Thomas Maslen" <maslen@dstc.edu.au>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Thomas, Actually an id() function is used two times within the signature of merlins "sixteen" suite: * id('notaries') ... In this case the element is found since the type of the attribute "Id" of the element "Notaries" is declared in the internal subset of the DTD. * id('object-3') ... In our implementation we validate the Signature element to be verified against the Schema grammar specified in the XML-Signature specification. So the type of the attribute "Id" of the element "Object" is recognized. Liebe Gruesse/Regards, --------------------------------------------------------------- DI Gregor Karlinger mailto:gregor.karlinger@iaik.at http://www.iaik.at Phone +43 316 873 5541 Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications Austria --------------------------------------------------------------- > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org]Im Auftrag von Thomas Maslen > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. Mai 2001 09:39 > An: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > Betreff: DTD-less id('object-3') -- what am I missing? > > > We have been checking Beta 1 of our (DSTC) implementation against > the interop > matrix and merlin-xmldsig-{fifteen,sixteen}. > > My understanding was that some of these documents should *not* verify, > because they have URIs that use id() functionality but the > documents do not > have DTDs that specify the relevant attributes with type ID. > > However, the interop matrix shows that everyone else has happily verified > these signatures (and so have we, but only by implementing something that > I think is a hack). > > So: > > - does my understanding need fixing? (an all too common event) > > - has everyone taken a pragmatic approach and implemented the moral > equivalent of the example in the XPointer spec? > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr#schemes > > (i.e. the last thing in section 4.3, immediately above section 5; > I'm not game to try writing a more accurate XPointer for it) > > - is there some other option that I should have realized? > > > Thomas Maslen > DSTC > > > (By the way, merlin-xmldsig-sixteen was just wonderful for > fingering bugs in > my comment-filtering code -- blessings be upon Merlin H). > > >
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 04:31:18 UTC