Hi, Sascha! XML 1.0 does define the ID attribute type but not the name of the attribute. XML Digital Signature uses "Id" and I incorrectly assumed that everyone else is also using "Id" :) However, it may not be the case and you can use any name "id", "ID", "this_is_my_id", etc. This is defenetly a bug in xmlsec and I will fix it (but righnt now I am not sure, how can I do it :) ). Will you mind to file a bug about this in bugzilla http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=xmlsec please? It'll be a good reminder for me :)
Thanks, Aleksey Sascha Breite wrote: >Dear Aleksey, > >I am using your xmlsec library on a WIN32 system. Step by step I get a >better understandig of how it works. But I have a simple question: > >I try to verify a XML document with an internal reference URI="#12345". But >the document node is identified by > > <MyNode id="12345">...</MyNode>...<Reference URI="#12345"/>... > >and not by > > <MyNode Id="12345">...</MyNode>...<Reference URI="#12345"/>... > >The difference is in "id" and "Id" (upper case 'i'). xmlSecDSigValidate() >will fail, because "id" wouldn't match with "Id". In the xmlsec sources I >changed "Id" to "id" and now it is working fine. > >But is this the right way? Or is there a "bug" inside the signed document, >which uses "id"? Or should xmlSecDSigValidate() accept "id", "Id" and (why >not?) "ID"? I am not sure about what W3C's "XML-Signature Syntax and >Processing" is saying about this... > >Thanks for your answer! > >Kindly regards, > >Sascha Breite > >
