On 5/24/19 10:46 AM, Cantor, Scott wrote:
On 5/24/19, 3:13 AM, "Colm O hEigeartaigh" <[email protected]> wrote:
It does support Canonical XML 1.1. However, it uses the older namespace of
http://www.w3.org/2006/12/xml-c14n11 that is defined in the XML Signature spec:
https://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core1/#sec-c14nAlg
Well, it's not a namespace, it's an algorithm identifier. It's generally the
responsibility of XML Signature to define the algorithm URIs that are used
within it, if it explicitly references them. Extensions that are outside the
spec can define their own URIs, but ultimately there's no absolute guarantee
that the defined URI would be maintained by a future version of XML Signature
if it decided to reference that new algorithm, though it likely would if there
was no good reason not to.
Agree, and we should remain compliant with the XML Signature spec and we
should not change the code to use the newer URI as that would likely
(definitely?) lead to interop issues.
--Sean
Of course, it's highly unlikely anybody would get their "stuff" together to actually do a
new version of XML Signature, but to the extent there's a "way" of doing this stuff,
that's how it would work.
-- Scott
