- From: Sean Mullan <sean.mullan@sun.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:11:00 +0000
- To: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Joseph Reagle wrote: > > On Friday 06 December 2002 09:51 am, Sean Mullan wrote: > > I have a question about dereferencing (or identifying) > > a Reference without a URI attribute. Section 4.3.3.1 of > > xmldsig-core states, 4th paragraph: > > > > "If the URI attribute is omitted altogether, the receiving > > application is expected to know the identity of the object". > > > > Further on, in section 4.3.3.2, it states: > > > > "Unless the URI-Reference is a 'same-document' reference as defined > > in [URI, Section 4.2], the result of dereferencing the URI-Reference > > MUST be an octet stream." > > > > Does the statement above apply to a Reference with no URI > > attribute? > > Interesting question, from the text my initial reading is that an "implicit > same-document reference" is not precluded. If fact, I'd expect this might > be common in the context of implicit references. > > > Can it be represented as either an octet stream or > > a node set? Or, since it is undefined, is it technically NOT a > > same-document reference, and therefore MUST be dereferenced/identified > > as an octet stream? > > While an interesting question, is this motivated by an actual example? I'm > wondering about the interop implications of this. For example, if I had a > signature with an implicit reference to a node-set, the first transform > might require a node-set for processing. Is this a problem? I don't see how > as the other side is already expected to know what the initial object is > (i.e., node-set). The question is not motivated by any specific example; I just wanted to make sure that I was strictly abiding by the specification, which seemed a little unclear to me. I'll assume a Reference w/o a URI attribute can implicitly refer to either a node-set or octet stream. Thanks, Sean
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 06:12:56 UTC