[xmlsec] XPointer problem

[Matthias Jung]

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(/*[1]/*[2])"  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 
statements

Matthias



Aleksey Sanin wrote:

> Ok, it was quick :) According to [1] and [2], the two expressions 
> "/1/2" and
> "xpointer(/1/2)" are *not* the same! While the first one is a correct 
> shorthand
> form, the second one (full form) does select a different node set.
> The equvivalent full form for "/1/2" would be "xpointer(/*[1]/*[2])". 
> You can find
> an example with some explanations in [3].
>
> Aleksey
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-element/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/PR-xptr-framework-20021113/
> [3] 
> http://www.zvon.org/xxl/xpointer/tutorial/OutputExamples/xml27_out.xml.html 
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmlsec mailing list
> xmlsec at aleksey.com
> http://www.aleksey.com/mailman/listinfo/xmlsec
>