- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 16:36:41 -0500
- To: JBoyer@PureEdge.com
- Cc: "merlin" <merlin@baltimore.ie>, "TAMURA Kent" <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
If we seperate out the issue of what sort of operation occurs (interset, substract, include-search-forward, etc.) and focus on the input, I'm still a little confused. Folks seems to have passed me by and agreed that the input nodeset is that of the *original* document. John said: Please see the first paragraph of Section 3.3 "Input and Evaluation Context of Signature Filter Transform": "...The XPath evaluation context for the node-set will be: A context node equal to the root node of the document whose node-set was provided as input to this transform..." http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2002JanMar/0196.html Yes, and the input is the nodeset resulting from the previous step (dereferencing and parsing a URI, or the output of the previous transform). If the previous transform was a similar XPath transform, then that input from the previous step would be the: An inclusive filter is a signature filter transform whose output node-set contains only those nodes in the subtrees identified by a given XPath expression. An exclusive filter is a signature filter transform whose output node-set contains all nodes of a document except those nodes in the subtrees identified by a given XPath expression. http://www.w3.org/Signature/Drafts/xmldsig-xpath/Overview.html#sec-Terminol ogy And consequently, if there was a "chain" of them, I'd expect what Gregor demonstrated [1]. What did I miss? [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2002JanMar/0218.html -- 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, 19 March 2002 16:36:49 UTC