Re: [wss-comment] Re: [wss] Comment on WSS Core 1.1

["Conor P. Cahill" <concahill@aol.com>]

Anthony Nadalin wrote on 8/30/2005, 11:22 PM:

 > And Ron what does this mean for the core and profiles ? What about
 > current implementations as this changes schema ? What value does this
 > bring to core ?

Ultimately I think it comes down to what type of ID's other specs can
and/or will use.    When other specs start to use xml:id for elements
that *aren't* security tokens (so there's no WSS profile to document the
ID) the WSS platforms will not be able to easily support signing such
elements.

I believe that this isn't an issue of "if", but rather an issue of when
and it's likely to be sooner rather than later.

While I think there's a bit of a chicken vs egg problem in here (why
should WSS define it if people aren't using it yet?), I think there's
also alot of a "they won't come until you build it" and so WSS should
build it by supplying support for the element so that other specs can
converge on it.

Conor