- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: 2000年7月12日 14:39:04 -0400
- To: Kevin Regan <kevinr@valicert.com>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
- Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20000712143904.00a04100@localhost>
At 15:38 7/10/00 -0700, Kevin Regan wrote: >I've been attempting to implement the latest XML Signature and C14N >specifications. However, I have a few questions. I'm sure John will be able to answer more authoratively, but an easy answer and question: >It seems that when computing the canonicalized form of an Element >representing a sub-tree of an XML document, the namespace declarations of >all the parents of the given element (all the way to the Document root >element) are included in that element as well as all of that Element's >children (unless overridden at some point). Yes. An element E has namespace nodes that represent its namespace declarations, any namespace declarations made by its ancestor that have not been overridden in E's declaration, the default namespace if it is non-empty, and the declaration of the prefix xml. http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710 This is done such that you can move a signature and ensure its namespace context is taken with it. > What I'm not exactly clear on >is if this applies to the actual Signature element for the signature being >created. I don't quite follow... >I don't think that it does (I don't believe that you need to >look at the parent elements of the Signature element to determine their >namespace declarations)? Is this correct? If not, wouldn't it mean that >the insertion point for the Signature element must be known in advance so >that these declarations can be obtained? Are there any differences for >detached, enveloped, or enveloping signatures? What do you mean known in advance? _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2000 14:39:19 UTC