To: "Henry S. Thompson (University of Edinburgh)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "David Beech (Oracle Corp.)" <email@example.com>, "Murray Maloney (Commerce One)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Noah Mendelsohn (Lotus Development Corporation)" <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>, "David C. Fallside (IBM)" email@example.com
The XML Signature WG thanks the XML Schema WG for their work and the opportunity to review the last call Working Draft . This comment does not address the ease of implementation but only whether the functionality as specified meets our requirements. To that end, the last call specification easily meets our requirements. In particular, the content types (elementOnly | empty | mixed | textOnly) and the Wildecard Schema Component
are very useful for dealing with mixed content scenarios which are common to
the signature domain. In time, the type extension capabilities might be a
useful feature in constructing other cryptographic (key and certificate)
syntaxes but we are presently not employing these typing features.
Since the XML Signature specification should enter the W3C Recommendation and IETF Standard tracks soon, we ask that the schema WG give priority to the need for a stabilized syntax and for expediently advancing the schema specification towards Recommendation.
Joseph Reagle, on behalf of the XML Signature WG