- From: Takeshi Imamura <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:37:17 +0900
- To: Ari Kermaier <arik@phaos.com>
- Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org
>>By the way, as to decryptXML(), it may be necessary to exchange step 2 and >>3 because an octet stream obtained in step 1 may not contain any namespace >>declaration attribute necessary for parsing the octet stream when >>decrypting an EncrypteData element within the octet stream. How do you >>feel? > >I'm not sure I understand. Isn't the parsing context C that would be used >in step 3 itself derived entirely from node-set X? If that's the case, >what's an example of a namespace declaration that would be in C but would >not be preserved by applying XML-C14N to X? To my understanding, C is not derived from X but derived from X's ancestor nodes. If X contains all namespace nodes that are declared in its ancestor nodes, it would be OK. But if not, parsing might fail. This could occur if any transforms prior to decryption transform removes any namespace node. So I thought that step 2 and 3 might have to be swapped. However, as I wrote in the previous mail, step 1 can be removed. So this may not be a problem now. Thanks, Takeshi IMAMURA Tokyo Research Laboratory IBM Research imamu@jp.ibm.com
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2002 02:37:13 UTC