See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 15 February 2011
<tlr> trackbot, start meeting
<trackbot> Meeting: XML Security Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 15 February 2011
<tlr> ScribeNick: mjensen
<fjh> No meeting 22 February. We will meet the following week, 1 March.
<fjh> Approve minutes, 8 February 2011
RESOLUTION: Minutes from 8 February 2011 are approved.
<fjh> Documents for CR: XML Signature 1.1, XML Encryption 1.1, XML Security Properties, XML Security Generic Hybrid Ciphers
<fjh> Also publish updates of 1.1 Requirements and RELAX NG Schemas
<fjh> Update to XML Encryption 1.1 and XML Signature 1.1 security considerations
<fjh> Updated draft of 1.1 requirements for publication is at
<fjh> Cynthia review comments, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2011Feb/0026.html
<fjh> Reference [XPTR-XPOINTER] is listed as January 2001, but the
<fjh> document says 11 September 2001
<fjh> i The reference [X509V3] does not list a web site. The site to buy the
<fjh> document is
<fjh> Bed2.0%7Den.pdf; however, the latest version is 2008, not the 1999 version
<fjh> listed in the reference.
<fjh> keep one we can reference hence 1999
<fjh> make change o and p
<fjh> next doc, explain http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2011Feb/0024.html
<fjh> Section 6.6.4 is listed as Enveloped Signature Transform, but the title is
<fjh> Signature Transform
<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: change 6.6.4 title in XML SIgnature 1.1 from Signature Transform to Enveloped Signature Transform
RESOLUTION: change 6.6.4 title in XML SIgnature 1.1 from Signature Transform to Enveloped Signature Transform
<fjh> these URLs are used as identifiers, not meant to be dereferenced
tlr: we need to do nothing here
<fjh> +1 to do nothing
<fjh> fix 24, [XMLDSIG-BESTPRACTICES] opens to http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.html#bib-XMLDSIG-BESTPRACTICES, but points to [SOAP12-PART1]
<fjh> fix 26, [XMLSEC-RELAXNG], opens to http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.html#bib-XMLSEC-RELAXNG, but points to [SOAP12-PART1]
fjh: if an identifier is outside of the w3c domain, it does not have to point to anything accessible
<fjh> 24 and 26 are non-issues
<fjh> changes needed: [XPTR-XPOINTER] date
<fjh> 6.6.4 title in XML SIgnature 1.1
fjh: what to tell people on this?
tlr: say "working on it"
<fjh> 3rd change - bibliography, cross references for CR versions
pdatta: I've looked at the differences of XPath 1.0 and XPath 2.0
... with xpath 2.0 you always have a schema
... comparison operator can depend on schema type
fjh: does this matter for us?
... i think no it doesn't
<fjh> note that xpath 1 used node sets, xpath 2 moves away from that, but suspect this doesn't matter for the profile since we use trees and not rely on nodesets
<fjh> not sure we need to support all the new types in xpath 2
<fjh> if we have a profile that profiles down
<fjh> wg needs to review this
<fjh> scott notes that relying on schema is bad for interoperability
<fjh> +1 to enumerate what is in
<scantor> seems tricky to me to say you can use relational operators but "make sure you don't have a schema"
<fjh> discussion of whether or not to allow 2.0 predicates, and whether schema is required in that case
<scantor> we have to weigh the value of predicates against the advantage of moving to XPath 2
<fjh> any volunteers to help with 2.0 examples?
<fjh> before Last Call, pratik has additional edits, need 2.0 examples in doc, XPath 1 vs 2 resolution