W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > July 2008

Re: Products

From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:08:45 -0400
Message-Id: <176B8549-EBC7-4F69-ABFB-6AC6CB417196@nokia.com>
Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-xmlsec@w3.org
To: ext Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>

to this list of WG products I would add:

XML Signature RNG Schema
XML Signature Errata
XML Encryption Errata
C14N Errata
Coordination

I think it is worth separating errata work from producing new  
maintenance editions.

I suggest we rename as follows, to have shorter names in case that  
works with tracker irc interface better, so list
short (wordy)

Rqmts (XML Signature and Canonicalization V Next Requirements)
Sig (Design for XML Signature V Next)
C14n (Design for Canonicalization V Next)
Enc (XML Encryption V Next)
BestPractices (XML Signature Best Practices)
RNGSchema (XML Signature, 1st and 2nd Edition RNG Schema)
C14NErrata (C14N Errata)
SigErrata (XML Signature Errata)
EncErrata (XML Encryption Errata)
Coordination (WG Coordination issues)

2ndSig (XML Signature Syntax and Processing Maintenance)
1stEnc (XML Encryption Syntax and Processing Maintenance)
C14N10 (Canonical XML 1.0 Maintenance)
C14N11(Canonical XML 1.1 Maintenance)
ExC14N (Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0 Maintenance)
DTransform (Decryption Tranform for XML Signature Maintenance)

Looks like a large number of products...

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Jul 17, 2008, at 11:05 AM, ext Thomas Roessler wrote:

> I'd propose we keep the following substantive products starting up:
>
> - XML Signature and Canonicalization V Next Requirements
> - Design for XML Signature V Next
> - Design for Canonicalization V Next
> - XML Encryption V Next
> - XML Signature Best Practices
>
> Maintenance deliverables:
>
> - XML Signature Syntax and Processing
> - XML Encryption Syntax and Processing
> - Canonical XML 1.0
> - Canonical XML 1.1
> - Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0
> - Decryption Tranform for XML Signature
>
> In terms of editing work, I suspect that it's not worth moving the
> maintenance deliverables to xmlspec.  It will be worth moving C14N
> and Signature to xmlspec once we know what shape these deliverables
> take.
>
> I also propose that we use xmlspec for the Requirements.
>
> Regards,
> -- 
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>  +33-4-89063488
Received on Monday, 21 July 2008 21:09:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:54 GMT