OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dss message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: FW: DSS RequestBaseType and VerifyRequest


Tommy, Andreas,
 
Is this something we missed in defining RequestBaseType?
 
Nick
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Gonzαlez-Cadenas [mailto:gonzalezcarlos@netfocus.es]
Sent: 26 January 2006 17:43
To: 'Nick Pope'
Subject: DSS RequestBaseType and VerifyRequest

Nick,

 

In the RequestBaseType definition from the DSS Core 3, the element InputDocuments is mandatory. As VerifyRequest extends from RequestBaseType, it’s mandatory to include at least one input document. This excludes the case of enveloping (an XML Signature with a reference to objects contained in ds:Objects) and attached (i.e. an CMS Signature with encapsulated content) signatures, where just a dss:Signature object would be sufficient.

 

I see that in former documents (i.e. wd34), RequestBaseType contained

 

<xs:element nameRequestBaseType” abstracttrue”>

<xs:sequence>

<xs:element refdss:OptionalInputs” minOccurs0”/>

<xs:element refdss:InputDocuments” minOccurs0”/>

</xs:sequence>

<xs:attribute nameRequestID” typexs:string”

useoptional”/>

<xs:attribute nameProfile” typexs:anyURI” useoptional”/>

</xs:element>

 

therefore allowing optionally the inputdocuments.

 

Is it only an editorial issue or maybe do you plan to handle these cases differently?.

 

Many thanks in advance,

Carlos

 

 

Carlos Gonzαlez-Cadenas
Chief Security Officer

netfocus
Diagonal 188-198 Planta 2
08018 Barcelona
tel: 902 303 393
fax: 902 303 394
gonzalezcarlos@netfocus.es
www.netfocus.es

 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]