[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Attachment element issue with applying i164
I’ve been discussing the changes I made to the text
for i164 with Frederick. The net is I may have made a bad decision in trying to
avoid changes to the SP 1.2 spec and schema. We may have an additional errata
on SP 1.2 to make the proper change here. The proposal we accepted for i164 was to add two new
elements underneath the Attachments element. The problem is that was defined as
an empty element with no extensibility. The new elements adopted in i164 are
not meaningful without the Attachments element, this is best reflected by nesting
them. The text and the schema itself prevent that nesting. That is why in
applying the proposal I placed the new elements in the SignedParts assertion
that contains the Attachments element. To place the elements the following changes would need to be
made as errata to SP 1.2: Change the description of Attachments as follows: Original: <sp:Attachments />? Proposed: <sp:Attachments> ... </sp:Attachments>? /sp:SignedParts/sp:Attachments Presence of this OPTIONAL Change the schema as follows: Original <xs:element name="Attachments"
type="tns:EmptyType" minOccurs="0" /> <xs:complexType name="EmptyType" /> Proposed <xs:element name="Attachments"
type="tns:AttachmentsType" minOccurs="0" /> <xs:complexType
name="AttachmentsType"> <xs:sequence> <xs:any minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" namespace="##other"
processContents="lax" /> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]