Re: [dss-x] Raw chat trace of meeting #186 on 2017-SEP-18

[Juan Carlos Cruellas <cruellas@ac.upc.edu>]

Hi Andreas,

This is just an acknowledgement of reception of your message. As I 
mentioned I will not be able to invest time in this topic until next 
week....I will react by then

Juan Carlos.
El 19/9/17 a las 20:19, Andreas Kuehne escribió:
> Hi Juan Carlos,
>
> before you invest time in a way to isolate a subtree out of a document
> using DOM please take into account that there are other ways of XML
> processing, like SAX or some type of language binding (e.g. JAXB in the
> Java space). We have to offer a well defined process that's easy to
> implement and language / framework independent. The flexibility of XML
> namespace declarations makes it very tricky to come up with a simple
> solution: A namespace declared on the root level is as valid as a
> declaration within the same element or within any element in between.
> And the namespace can be redeclared. That may happen before we reach the
> subtree we like to extract. Some of these inherited namespaces are
> required for the subtree,  the other MUST be dropped.I would guess we
> quickly end up in re-defining the namespace-related part of exclusive
> canonicalization! Maybe the complexity of this is topic is the reason
> why there isn't a simple method defined in the DOM specification.
>
> As I mentioned JAXB above: This is the XML of the 'plain vanilla' JAXB
> serialization of a DSS verification request:
>
>      <SOAP-ENV:Body>
>          <ns2:VerifyRequest
> xmlns:ns2="urn:oasis:names:tc:dss:1.0:core:schema"
>              xmlns:ns3="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#";
> xmlns:ns4="http://uri.etsi.org/019512/v1.0#";
>             
> xmlns:ns5="urn:oasis:names:tc:dss:1.0:profiles:asynchronousprocessing:1.0"
>              RequestID="TestIdSign--5492689337464250234">
>              <ns2:SignatureObject>
>                  <ns3:Signature>
>                     
> <ns3:SignatureValue>H3eXrKtSF/MPJnNMzWF1rgpLBla+ei687C+Btq3q0gIOuTZZcxJf+MPY3lucP2cnNiWTk+eLWLhp
> [...]
>
> As you can see there is the need to respect _some_ of namespace
> declarations given _outside_ of the relevant Signature object. So I
> would like to vote for a drop of this last resort of 'inlined XML'
> instead of taking the burden to define an extraction scheme.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andreas