- From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 16:42:16 +0100
- To: "Brian LaMacchia" <bal@microsoft.com>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
I agree (subject to usual caveats of not delaying the process). Merlin r/bal@microsoft.com/2001.10.10/11:13:54 >XMLDSIG Section 4.3.3.1 contains this paragraph which identifies when >you can elide the URI attribute on a Reference: > >If the URI attribute is omitted altogether, the receiving application is >expected to know the identity of the object. For example, a lightweight >data protocol might omit this attribute given the identity of the object >is part of the application context. This attribute may be omitted from >at most one Reference in any particular SignedInfo, or Manifest. > >What is the justification for the restriction embodied in the last >sentence? Once you elide a single URI attribute from a Reference, >you're guaranteed to be in an application-specific domain where the >verifier must have out-of-band knowledge to match up Reference and >referenced content. Given that the receiving application has to know >how to find one referenced object, why can't it know implicitly how to >find multiple referenced objects and match them up? Since we're talking >about application-specific context anyway there's no interop issue, so >what's the benefit of having the restriction on elided URLs? > >Unless there's a compelling reason to keep the restriction (which I >can't see), I suggest we remove it and delete the last sentence of the >quoted paragraph from 4.3.3.1. > > --bal > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct, special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on. In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or appearance at trade shows and conferences. This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including computer viruses. http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2001 11:42:22 UTC