- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 09:46:59 -0600
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <877fw6ucuk.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
XML Processing Model WG
Meeting 263, 28 Jan 2015
See also: [2]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Jim, Norm, Alex, Henry
Regrets
Chair
Norm
Scribe
Norm
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
2. [5]Next meeting
3. [6]Review of open action items
4. [7]Any other business?
* [8]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [9]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/07-minutes
Accepted.
Next meeting
4 Feb 2015, any regrets?
No regrets heard
Review of open action items
Jim reports completion of A-260-01
->
[10]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2015Jan/0007.html
And A-260-02
->
[11]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2015Jan/0009.html
And A-260-03
->
[12]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2015Jan/0008.html
Jim: The open question is, for the use cases, I've culled some from
previos versions.
... And written my own.
... I've also asked in public about the non-XML flows.
Jim: Should we put these in the requirements document?
Norm: If the WG agrees that they're use cases we want to take on for 2.0,
then I think we can add them to the Use Cases and Requirements document.
Jim: We put the use cases in and we traced them back to the spec; we also
traced requirements back.
... Do we want to do that now? Not sure.
... I'll send them along be email and we can start with those and see what
we want to do.
Norm: Sounds good to me.
... You also sent mail about a p:sign step.
Jim: Yes, I saw that we had discussed that previously.
Alex: I think signatures in general, XML Signatures being a specific case,
would be worth exploring.
... There's lots of code out there and it's a good thing. It seems
possibly like two different steps.
Some discussion of exec and eval
Jim: I'll take a stab at p:sign for the XML case and the non-XML case.
<Zakim> ht, you wanted to mention use of metadata for this
Henry: It occurs to me that as is the case with some other aspects of what
you can consider ultimate outcome, some steps may be properly implemented
as actually only adding metadata.
... It's perfectly coherent to say that I have an XML Signature step that
only bites at the edge of the pipeline.
... It doesn't have to be the case that adding an XML Signature step means
that thereafter what's flowing through the pipeline is encrypted.
... Also, wrt the observation about implementability, I think we have an
opportunity to do a good deed and enlist help in doing it.
... I think the fact that XML Encryption is not widely used is a real flaw
in the XML ecology and adding easy, straightfoward support in XProc v.next
would be a huge encouragement to people to use it.
... So I think if we asked the community that does know how it works to
help, they'd help because it's a win-win.
ACTION A-26x-01: Norm to ask Frederick Hirsch for help with the encryption
implementation parts.
Henry: And finally, wrt use cases, I implemented a bunch of support for
interactions with amazon web services with the Markup Pipeline for which
the "B-case" that Alex mentioned was front-and-center.
... Take this 256 bit key as represented in hex and this string and
encrypt it so that I can then send it to Amazon web services.
Alex: I think that's just signed for Amazon
Henry: Yes, that might be the case.
Alex: Making that kind of API easier to use would be a very good thing.
Henry: I'm pretty sure I used p:exec for the signature, but I'll drag out
the architecture to look at.
Alex: I'll take an action to collection some data too.
Norm: I think we're drifting towards "we need to make OAuth easy from
pipelines."
ACTION A-26x-02: Alex to consider the requirements for making it easy for
pipelines to talk to web APIst that use these styles of encryption.
Jim: About the edges of the pipeline, are you thinking of a pipeline that
just adds metadata to the document?
Henry: Yes and no. What I was thinking of was a pipeline that has a whole
bunch of stuff that constructs a document. At some point it wants to
specify that some portion of the document should be signed.
... It should be able to do that at the point where that part of the
document is in focus. This ought to be able to be used as a subpipeline
for example where the whole document isn't in view.
... Suppose it took an XPath and a bunch of args, and said at this point
in the pipeline, so the element identified by that XPath should be
encrypted.
... Nothing happens except some metadata gets added to document so that
*when it's output from the pipeline* the encryption will be performed.
... It amounts to instructions to the output step that go in the metadata.
This is useful for other things, like setting the encoding for the
document.
Alex: So I have a bunch of questions that come from that: is this how the
pipeline is deployed or effected by the information flowing through it.
... It could be a binding outside the pipeline or it could be something
the serializer actually does.
Henry: I'm thinking of the latter.
Jim: I don't think we need to go deeper today, I just wanted to
understand.
Any other business?
Jim: Where is TPAC? Japan?
Norm: Yes, Japan. I'm hoping to go, but it's unclear.
Alex: I'd like to go, I have a colleague there. I don't know if that's
going to be possible.
Jim: If we know we're going, we could start trying to get some interest up
in that part of the world.
<ht> I think that would be a great idea
Some discussion of a f2f in Edinburgh in June. Still planning.
Adjourned.
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [13]scribe.perl version 1.140 ([14]CVS
log)
$Date: 2015-01-28 15:45:38 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/2015/01/28-xproc-irc
3. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes#agenda
4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes#item01
5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes#item02
6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes#item03
7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes#item04
8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/28-minutes#ActionSummary
9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2015/01/07-minutes
10. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2015Jan/0007.html
11. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2015Jan/0009.html
12. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2015Jan/0008.html
13. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
14. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2015 15:47:33 UTC