- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 16:08:13 -0500
- To: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
On Tuesday 08 January 2002 13:04, Rich Salz wrote: > I believe that the SignatureProperty and Object element definitions > should be modified to allow the xml:space attribute. I'm proposing > those two, because I believe those are the most likely elements within > ds:Signature that will be covered by a signature. Hi Rich, we are on the very cusp (I hope this week) of getting IESG approval and moving forward. Consequently, the only tweaks we've accepted since we entered PR are those that don't upset *any* person, previous concensus, instances, or implementations: just small tweaks that make the spec better in everyone's eyes. To implement your proposal we'd have two options: 1. Add the following to the two element definitions that would then permit xml:space and xml:lang <anyAttribute namespace="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace"/> 2. Or to enable xml:space but preclude xml:lang: <xsd:import namespace="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/xml.xsd"/> ... <xsd:attribute ref="xml:space" use="optional"/> I don't see either violating my threshold of slipping it in if others think this is a good idea and no one objects. (The first is better IMHO.) However, if you did this, wouldn't this also preserve the whitespace between the ds:Object and the ext:Foo? I'd think that if you're worried about the whitespace in ext:Foo, it should have the xml:space, not necessarily the ds:Object? -- 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 Tuesday, 8 January 2002 16:08:14 UTC