[xmlsec] XPointer problem
matthias.jung at xtradyne.com
Wed Mar 12 01:18:18 PST 2003
Ok, that clearifys a lot.
My intention of putting "#xpointer(/1/2)" within the signature's
reference was to use the shorthand form "/1/2".
Due to the xmlsec restriction xpointer expressions always have to start
with "#xpointer(" or "#xmlns(",
I just injected the shorthand form into the #xpoitner(expr) statement.
Unfortunately I did not know the meaning would be different.
I have adapted my tests using the longer expression
"xpointer(/*/*)" and everything is fine.
Do you see a chance (or need) of supporting the shorthand form of
xpointers in xmlsec?
I am not sure if this would confilct with the possible ID attribute
meaning within the URI attribute.
Thanks for effort on working out the different meanings between these
Aleksey Sanin wrote:
> Ok, it was quick :) According to  and , the two expressions
> "/1/2" and
> "xpointer(/1/2)" are *not* the same! While the first one is a correct
> form, the second one (full form) does select a different node set.
> The equvivalent full form for "/1/2" would be "xpointer(/*/*)".
> You can find
> an example with some explanations in .
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-element/
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/PR-xptr-framework-20021113/
> xmlsec mailing list
> xmlsec at aleksey.com
More information about the xmlsec