RE: [dss] base64

[Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>]

At 08:27 PM 10/7/2003 -0400, Rich Salz wrote:

>Using MIME types is in line with where SOAP 1.2 is headed, so I like that.

Just to be clear - are you voting for one of these choices? -

1) XML can be plain or base64; everything else is base64 -
     <XMLData>
     <Base64XMLData>
     <Base64BinaryData> (with a MimeType attribute)

2) The way Rich's schema initially had it - like above, but also with the 
option for un-encoded non-XML text:
     <XMLData>
     <Base64XMLData>
     <Base64BinaryData> (with a MimeType attribute)
     <TextData> (" " ")

3) The way it currently is: everything is base64'd
     <Data> (with a MimeType attribute)


>To do an XML DSIG you need to know if the input is XML or a bytestream,
>which you can pretty much figure out from the MIME type (there are a bunch
>of formats, but if you see the letters 'xml' you can make a safe guess :).

And there's another complication - From XML-DSIG 4.3.3.2:

"Unless the URI-Reference is a 'same-document' reference as defined in 
[URI, Section 4.2], the result of dereferencing the URI-Reference MUST be 
an octet stream. In particular, an XML document identified by URI is not 
parsed by the signature application unless the URI is a same-document 
reference or unless a transform that requires XML parsing is applied. (See 
Transforms (section 4.3.3.1).)"

For each <InputDocument>, we're sending a 'RefURI' attribute which tells 
the server how to refer to it, so the server can figure out which to treat 
it as (i.e whether it's a same-document reference or not).  I don't think 
we need to do anything else to support this distinction, but I'm not sure.

Trevor