W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > July 2007

RE: Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2007 July 18

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:32:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D302081C7A46@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Grosso, Paul
> Sent: Wednesday, 2007 July 18 10:51
> To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2007 July 18

> XML Sec Maint WG and xpointer
> -----------------------------
> The XML Sec Maint WG is working on a PER for digital signatures.
> The Rec references the xpointer() XPointer scheme normatively,
> referencing the failed CR.
> 
> There are no good solutions.  We recommend they reference the
> latest version (the WD) and explain in text what implementations
> should do.
> 
> ACTION to Paul:  Send email to the XML Sec Maint WG with our
> recommendation.

Done, see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-cg/2007Jul/0019
(which is a response to a thread that had been ongoing on
the XML CG list).

One other thing we did not discuss on the call but that I
discussed in the above referenced email is the erroneous
claim in the digital signatures spec that use of XPointer
implies loss of comments.

> 
> Philippe says the SML WG is trying to reference xpointer().  See
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2007/xml/sml/build/sml.htm
> l?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8
> We should tell them not to do that. 
> 
> ACTION to Paul:  Send email to the SML group telling them that
> they are normatively referencing a WD that is dead.

Done, see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2007Jul/0069

paul
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 16:37:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:38 UTC