W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org > May 2007

Draft minutes: XMLSec weekly 2007-05-22

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 21:55:59 +0200
To: public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070523195558.GC23223@raktajino.does-not-exist.org>

Thanks to Phill for the scribing and clean-up.  I've updated the
online version here:

  http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes

Regards,
-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>






----- Forwarded message from Phillip Hallam-Baker -----

To: tlr@w3.org, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 14:00:04 -0400
Subject: Minutes
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5


   [1]W3C 

XML Security Spec Maintenance WG
22 May 2007

   [2]Agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

Attendees

   Present

   EdSimon, Thomas, +1.617.876.aaaa, sean, Hal_Lockhart, +1.410.695.aabb,
   rmiller3, GregWhitehead, R_Salz, jcc, PHB, [IBMCambridge], klanz2

   Regrets

   FrederickHirsch, GilesHogben, AlekseySanin, PeterLipp

   Chair

   tlr

   Scribe

   phb

Contents

           [4]Topics

   1.     [5]convene, administrivia

   2.     [6]last meeting's minutes

   3.     [7]action item review

   4.     [8]workshop planning

   5.     [9]Status of drafts: C14N11 (from XML Core)

   6.     [10]Status of drafts: DSig Core

           [11]Summary of Action Items
   ______________________________________________________________________



   <tlr> Date: 22 May 2007

   <tlr> scribe: phb

   <tlr> agendum 2=last meeting's minutes

   <tlr> agendum 3= action item review

   <tlr> hi greg

   <grw> hi

   <tlr> interesting

   <tlr> ScribeNick: hal

   convene, administrivia

   last meeting's minutes

   resolution: next meeting May 29

   <tlr> [12]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-xmlsec-minutes

   resolution: minutes accepted

   action item review

   <tlr> ACTION-5 closed

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry... I don't know how to close ACTION yet

   <tlr> ACTION-6 continued; Konrad absent

   <tlr> ACTION-22 done

   <tlr> ACTION-26 continue

   workshop planning

   <tlr> [13]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/ws/cfp.html

   <jcc> q

   jcc: noticed typo what would be the limits on number of people from each
   org?

   tlr: if we have excessive numbers we will limit attendance... standard
   escape hatch hope to close cfp as soon as possible final closure in 2 weeks

   <scribe> ScribeNick: PHB2


   ACTION: hal to propose additional types of contributions for workshop CFP
   [recorded in [14]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-28 - Propose additional types of contributions
   for workshop CFP [on Hal Lockhart - due 2007-05-29].


   <tlr> [15]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40279/workshop-timing/results

   Tlr: Timeline for the workshop, form open, Sept 25-27 days where no known
   conflicts aim for that

   proposal 25,26 Tues and Wed

   (no objections)

   jcc: : may be an issue regarding availability of hotels

    

   Thomas: ok don't do catalonia Do meeting of follow-up group Keep offer in
   grateful consideration for the followup work sometime next year

   Thomas: should we do east or west coast? takeup Hal's offer

   Hal: given likely number of participants, any likely issues?

   Thomas: given number of attewndees (40+) consider AV support


   <tlr> ACTION: thomas to go through hosting requirements with Hal [recorded
   in [16]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-29 - Go through hosting requirements with Hal
   [on Thomas Roessler - due 2007-05-29].

    

   Thomas: next steps need to discuss chair, have candidates, need approval
   from W3C management

   Thomas: Once approved everyone must send in a position paper (inc. members)
   Participation is open to broad community, not just W3C


   <tlr> ACTION: thomas to propose detailed timeline for CFP by mail [recorded
   in [17]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-30 - Propose detailed timeline for CFP by mail
   [on Thomas Roessler - due 2007-05-29].

    

   HAL: Is there a special protocol for members?

   Thomas: no everyone must submit a paper

   Status of drafts: C14N11 (from XML Core)

   <tlr>
   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0028.h
   tml

   <tlr>
   [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0040

   Thomas: status of CR-Recommendation from XML-Core ... good time to raise
   issues

   EdSimon: In the minutes we said we don't expect to give further feedback to
   XMLCore, this is respect to C14N 1.1 item

   Thomas: yes, this is the case ... no extensive discussion on 1.1 C18N other
   issues are open

   Status of drafts: DSig Core

   <tlr> [20]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/

   Progress issue, 3 months after CR status and 2 interoperable implementations

   <tlr> [21]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/changes.html

   <EdS> c18n should be c14n

   Need to walk through draft once more to see that people are OK with changes
   that have taken place

   <tlr>
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-CoreGeneration

   <tlr>  The  Reference Processing Model (section 4.3.3.2) requires that
   validators use Canonical XML 1.0 [XML-C14N] when a transformation that would
   expect an octet-stream as input is applied to a node-set. We RECOMMEND that
   generators do not rely on this default behavior, but explicitly identify the
   transformation that is applied to perform this mapping. In cases in which
   inclusive canonicalization is desired, we RECOMMEND that Canonical XML 1.1
   [XML-C14N11] be used.

   jcc: if an operation is applied on the input, it is not applied to the node
   set,

   thomas: replace applied to a node set with better wording

   <tlr> "is applied to a node-set" -> "would be applied to a nodeset"?

   <tlr>  The  Reference Processing Model (section 4.3.3.2) requires that
   validators use Canonical XML 1.0 [XML-C14N] when a transformation that would
   expect an octet-stream as input is applied to a node-set.

   Thomas: can everyone live with that

   <tlr>  The  Reference Processing Model (section 4.3.3.2) requires that
   validators use Canonical XML 1.0 [XML-C14N] when a transformation that would
   expect an octet-stream as input +++ WOULD BE +++ applied to a node-set.

   Thomas: the point being that the transformation cannot be applied to the
   node set

   <jcc> would expecte an octet-stream as input receives a node-set

   jcc: not quite

   Thomas: propose wordsmithing change to the mailing list.

   Thomas is the normative intent of this change acceptable?


   <tlr> ACTION: jcc to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
   sentence on mailing list [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - jcc

   <tlr> ACTION: juan-carlos to propose rewording of "Reference processing
   model" sentence on mailing list [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - juan-carlos

   <tlr> ACTION: cruellas to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
   sentence on mailing list [recorded in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]

   <trackbot-ng>  Created  ACTION-31  -  Propose rewording of \"Reference
   processing model\" sentence on mailing list [on Juan Carlos Cruellas - due
   2007-05-29].

   <tlr> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: normative changes in 3.1.1 agreed

    

   sean: first time validator and generator used in text, should be defined?

   Thomas (explains terms)

   sean: fine with the terms, just should we put in a definitio

   hal: hard to see how can have a recomendation without an actor, will someone
   take a recomendation?

   Thomas: sean will you volunteer?

   Sean: give it a shot


   <tlr> ACTION: sean to propose language for "validator" and "generator" that
   is   more   in   line   with   rest   of   rec's  style  [recorded  in
   [26]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-32 - Propose language for \"validator\" and
   \"generator\" that is more in line with rest of rec\'s style [on Sean Mullan
   - due 2007-05-29].

   <tlr>
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-RetrievalMethod

   <tlr>
   [28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0006.h
   tml

   <tlr> "For example, a reference that results in the digesting of an |Object|
   element  containing  a  |SignatureProperties| element is still of type
   |#Object|"

    

   thomas: current languahge in 4.4.3

   <klanz2> sorry for being late

   thomas: proposal from greg whitehead to add above

   <tlr>
   [29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.h
   tml

   red text agreed in cambridge, greg proposes adding text

   hal: makes it a lot clearer nothing like a good for example

    

   Thomas: propose accepting change


   (confusion as to where we are)


   Proposal is to change 4.3.3.1

   <tlr> [30]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-URI

   Greg: proposal was to change text, was refining JCC's proposal


   <tlr> PROPOSED change: "For example, a reference that identifies an Object
   element containing a SignatureProperties element is still of type #Object."
   -> "For example, a reference that results in the digesting of an |Object|
   element  containing  a  |SignatureProperties| element is still of type
   |#Object|"

   <tlr> RESOLUTION: proposed edit from
   [31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.h
   tml

    

   Thomas: test case, any news?

   Question about 19

    

   Konrad: havent done up to now, should not be too hard should be done today


   <tlr> ACTION-19 hopefully closed today

   <tlr> E01 remains unresolved


   Thomas: Changes to e05 agreed? As are ?? changes to the schema confirming
   proposed normative changes

    

   jcc: issue with the change

   thomas: its a browser issue will change the formatting to make it readable


   <tlr>  ACTION:  thomas to change formatting of 4.4.3 note [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-33 - Change formatting of 4.4.3 note [on Thomas
   Roessler - due 2007-05-29].

   <tlr> [33]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg

    

   thomas: c14n algorithms

   <tlr> This specification REQUIRES implementation of both Canonical XML 1.0
   [XML-C14N] and Canonical XML 1.1 [XML-C14N11]. We RECOMMEND that generators
   chose Canonical XML 1.1 [XML-C14N11] when inclusive canonicalizatoin is
   desired.

   people please review and approve this text


   <tlr> sean: fix canonicalizatoin to canonicalization!

   jcc: query resolution

   thomas: clarify
   ... 6.5.2, (describe changes)
   ... identifiers left open for now renew identifier proposed for last call or
   come  up  with  a new one if the text changes may need new identifier,
   otherwise reuse old one


   <tlr>  ACTION:  konrad  to  verify  that  CR  version of C14N11 has no
   conformance-affecting changes against
   [34]http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/   [recorded   in
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09]

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-34 - Verify that CR version of C14N11 has no
   conformance-affecting changes against
   [36]http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/ [on Konrad Lanz - due
   2007-05-29].

   jcc: request clarification

   thomas: describe changes to note in 6.5.2, grammar changes only

   <tlr> ed simon: move note above 6.5.1

   <tlr> so resolved

   <tlr> [37]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg

   <tlr> Note: The Reference Generation Model (section 3.1.1) includes further
   restrictions on the reliance of implicitly defined default transformations
   by signature generators.

   <tlr> of -> upon

   <klanz2> btw. : CR
   [38]http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2007/05/CR-xml-c14n11-20070509

   Thomas: ok everyone? nobody objects? ... done with the agenda

   adjorned

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: cruellas to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
   sentence on mailing list [recorded in
   [39]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: hal to propose additional types of contributions for workshop
   CFP [recorded in
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: jcc to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
   sentence on mailing list [recorded in
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: juan-carlos to propose rewording of "Reference processing
   model" sentence on mailing list [recorded in
   [42]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
   [NEW]  ACTION:  konrad  to  verify  that  CR  version of C14N11 has no
   conformance-affecting changes against
   [43]http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/   [recorded   in
   [44]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09]
   [NEW] ACTION: sean to propose language for "validator" and "generator" that
   is   more   in   line   with   rest   of   rec's  style  [recorded  in
   [45]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW]  ACTION:  thomas to change formatting of 4.4.3 note [recorded in
   [46]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08]
   [NEW] ACTION: thomas to go through hosting requirements with Hal [recorded
   in [47]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: thomas to propose detailed timeline for CFP by mail [recorded
   in [48]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]

   [End of minutes]
   ______________________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [49]scribe.perl version 1.128 ([50]CVS
    log)
    $Date: 2007/05/22 14:07:43 $
   ______________________________________________________________________

References

   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0034.html
   3. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-irc
   4. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#agenda
   5. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item01
   6. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item02
   7. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item03
   8. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item04
   9. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item05
  10. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item06
  11. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#ActionSummary
  12. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-xmlsec-minutes
  13. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/ws/cfp.html
  14. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01
  15. http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40279/workshop-timing/results
  16. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02
  17. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03
  18. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0028.html
  19. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0040
  20. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/
  21. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/changes.html
  22. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-CoreGeneration
  23. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04
  24. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05
  25. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06
  26. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07
  27. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-RetrievalMethod
  28. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0006.html
  29. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.html
  30. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-URI
  31. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.html
  32. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08
  33. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg
  34. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/
  35. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09
  36. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/
  37. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg
  38. http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2007/05/CR-xml-c14n11-20070509
  39. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06
  40. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01
  41. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04
  42. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05
  43. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/
  44. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09
  45. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07
  46. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08
  47. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02
  48. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03
  49. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  50. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/


----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Wednesday, 23 May 2007 19:56:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:59 GMT