Sanjiva, Can you substantiate these claims by references to the spec or concrete examples?
Andreas On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 03:51, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the clear writeup Andreas. > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:41 AM, Andreas Veithen > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> removal of redundant namespace declarations? I don't know the C14N >> specs well enough to answer that question, but I've seen that these >> specs make provisions to preserve the namespace context of the element >> and also define an algorithm to remove redundant namespace >> declarations (search for "superfluous" or "unnecessary" namespace >> declarations through the specs). > > Simple answer is that yes the spec is sensitive to any nodes being removed, > including seemingly redundant namespace nodes. As Alek noted, with the > advent of XPath, its now possible for a namespace declaration that looks > redundant to an XML parser to actually be required. However this case is > simpler- the element is signed and removing the node breaks the signature. > I think we need to have a way to say "don't mess with the XML serialization > AT ALL" .. that is what we want in the case of Synapse is not just an > infoset preserving serialization but rather the EXACT serialization. > Sanjiva. > -- > Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. > Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation; > http://www.opensource.lk/ > Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2; http://wso2.com/ > Founder & Director; Thinkcube Systems; http://www.thinkcube.com/ > Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ > Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ > > Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
