Re: [xml] validating xmld:dsig schema with a large size serial number

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

[ Note: Jean-Marc Desperrier email has been bouncing on my previous reply ...]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:34:20AM +0100, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> On 2008-03-12 10:41, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> >  If you provide a patch to grow to 5 long and it doesn't look silly
> > I may apply it to avoid the problem, but really this is a bad case of
> > misuse affecting implementation.
>
> The standard suggests all but 'minimally conforming' processors should 
> not have a digit limit(*), so simply increasing a fairly arbitrary limit 
> based on one schema seems like a hack rather than a fix.
>
> I suppose a patch that solves it "correctly" by using GMP's types to 
> represent such values (would handle both xs:decimal and xs:integer for 
> arbitrary number of digits) would not be accepted due to the extra 
> library dependency? Although, with GCC now using it, perhaps the 
> threshold for using GMP is lowered somewhat.

  I don't want to depend on an external library for this.
  I don't want to have libxml2 behave differently depending on the
platform or processor used (assuming same configuration options), that's
for example why I didn't want to use 'long long' for implementing the 18
digits, even if it would have been way easier (but non portable).
  Libxml2 is used in embedded systems, they may not use those compilers
or have that library, still i expect them to use XSD there, and I want
an uniformity of support at least to the extend I can manage.

  If you provide patches working within those constraints I will definitely
look at them,

Daniel

-- 
Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/
Daniel Veillard      | virtualization library  http://libvirt.org/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine  http://rpmfind.net/