[widgets] DigSig - proposed change to XML Signature Properties

2010-01-07 Thread Arthur Barstow 
The XML Security WG is considering changing the syntax of the Profile  
and Role elements of the XML Signature Properties spec.


It appears to me the proposed change would affect at least sections 5. 
{1,2,3} and the example.


If you have any comments on the proposed changes, please send them to  
both public-webapps@w3.org and public-xml...@w3.org.


Frederick, Scott - would you please explain the rationale for the  
proposed change?


-Art Barstow

Begin forwarded message:

From: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston)  
frederick.hir...@nokia.com

Date: January 7, 2010 1:31:20 PM EST
To: ext Scott Cantor canto...@osu.edu
Cc: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston)  
frederick.hir...@nokia.com, XMLSec WG Public List public- 
xml...@w3.org, Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston)  
art.bars...@nokia.com
Subject: Re: ISSUE-163, standalone XSD and RNG schema needed for  
Signature Properties


Thanks very much Scott.

I'll check with Art Barstow, Chair of WebApps regarding the suggestion
to change the Profile and Role elements to see if that would have a
negative impact on them.

What do others think, any issue with making that change if acceptable
to the Webapps WG? Any objection?

specifically, I think the suggestion is to change

element name=Profile type=dsp:ProfileType/
   complexType name=ProfileType
 attribute name=URI type=anyURI/
   /complexType

to

element name=Profile type=anyURI/

and likewise for Role.

Are there any other issues or concerns with this updated schema that
Scott sent? I'd like to update the Signature Properties schema
snippets to match, link in this schema, and get help on creating an
RNG schema (anyone here feel that they can handle it for this
relatively simple schema?)

I'd also like to incorporate an example as Scott suggests, preferably
one from WebApps.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Jan 7, 2010, at 12:18 PM, ext Scott Cantor wrote:

I checked in a draft xsd schema file after extracting the schema  
from

the examples and starting to try to fix some errors, in case that
helps an easier start:


http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-properties/xmldsig- 
properties-

schema.xsd


A valid version is attached, with the following changes:

- fixing some errors and missing prefixes
- removing extra type definitions when the element is just a  
string or

dateTime

In addition, I would suggest changing the two properties that are
empty
elements with the URI attributes into elements with a type of anyURI
and
just putting the value into the element.

Note that I'm also just correcting the schema as given, and since
there are
no examples in the document, I can't tell you for sure whether the
XML you
*want* is represented.

-- Scott

xmldsig-properties-schema.xsd

Re: [widgets] DigSig - proposed change to XML Signature Properties

2010-01-07 Thread Frederick Hirsch 
Given the CR stage [1] of Widgets Signature, it probably makes sense  
to not make this schema change, since it would break implementations,  
even though changes are still allowed at this stage. As Scott notes,  
it is more of a style issue - however I thought it worth mentioning  
given that Signature Properties is about to enter Last Call.



regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi


On Jan 7, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:


The XML Security WG is considering changing the syntax of the Profile
and Role elements of the XML Signature Properties spec.

It appears to me the proposed change would affect at least sections 5.
{1,2,3} and the example.

If you have any comments on the proposed changes, please send them to
both public-webapps@w3.org and public-xml...@w3.org.

Frederick, Scott - would you please explain the rationale for the
proposed change?

-Art Barstow

Begin forwarded message:


From: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston)
frederick.hir...@nokia.com
Date: January 7, 2010 1:31:20 PM EST
To: ext Scott Cantor canto...@osu.edu
Cc: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston)
frederick.hir...@nokia.com, XMLSec WG Public List public-
xml...@w3.org, Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston)
art.bars...@nokia.com
Subject: Re: ISSUE-163, standalone XSD and RNG schema needed for
Signature Properties

Thanks very much Scott.

I'll check with Art Barstow, Chair of WebApps regarding the  
suggestion

to change the Profile and Role elements to see if that would have a
negative impact on them.

What do others think, any issue with making that change if acceptable
to the Webapps WG? Any objection?

specifically, I think the suggestion is to change

element name=Profile type=dsp:ProfileType/
  complexType name=ProfileType
attribute name=URI type=anyURI/
  /complexType

to

element name=Profile type=anyURI/

and likewise for Role.

Are there any other issues or concerns with this updated schema that
Scott sent? I'd like to update the Signature Properties schema
snippets to match, link in this schema, and get help on creating an
RNG schema (anyone here feel that they can handle it for this
relatively simple schema?)

I'd also like to incorporate an example as Scott suggests, preferably
one from WebApps.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Jan 7, 2010, at 12:18 PM, ext Scott Cantor wrote:


I checked in a draft xsd schema file after extracting the schema
from
the examples and starting to try to fix some errors, in case that
helps an easier start:



http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-properties/xmldsig-
properties-

schema.xsd


A valid version is attached, with the following changes:

- fixing some errors and missing prefixes
- removing extra type definitions when the element is just a
string or
dateTime

In addition, I would suggest changing the two properties that are
empty
elements with the URI attributes into elements with a type of anyURI
and
just putting the value into the element.

Note that I'm also just correcting the schema as given, and since
there are
no examples in the document, I can't tell you for sure whether the
XML you
*want* is represented.

-- Scott

xmldsig-properties-schema.xsd

RE: [widgets] DigSig - proposed change to XML Signature Properties

2010-01-07 Thread Scott Cantor 
Arthur Barstow wrote on 2010-01-07:
 Frederick, Scott - would you please explain the rationale for the
 proposed change?

I was asked to produce an XSD for the Signature Properties document, and I
saw that it was using an overly complex syntax to express something that's
just a URI. Using complex XML types tends to bother some people's software
much more than using simple text node element content does.

It's just a personal observation based on experience. If you have this in
running code and don't want to change it, that's fine.

-- Scott