W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 1999

XML Infoset (Minutes:1999.06.02 XML Syntax WG)

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 08:00:05 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Note that the XML people have identified a significant amount of overlap
between C14N (Canonicalization) and the Infoset working group. If people are
interested in the C14N issues, I suggest they look at the most recent
Infoset Draft. [1] I hope the Syntax WG will have a first public WD prior to
the IETF meeting -- but I'm not convinced we will.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset

Forwarded Text ----
 Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 22:12:29 -0700
 To: "XML Syntax WG" <w3c-xml-syntax-wg@w3.org>
 From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
 Subject: Minutes:1999.06.02 XML Syntax WG

 4. Canonicalization
 NOTE: James Tauber *does* have time to put into this, but wants a
 ACTION: Chairs to recruit co-editor
 Issue: possible overlap with Infoset
 CONSENSUS: There is a real co-ordination issue here
 CONSENSUS: Portions of XML documents considered "Required" should be
            identical to that included in the canonical form.
 ACTION: T.Bray to send message to Megginson, cc the CG, noting this.
 CONSENSUS: In section 3, use infoset terminology & be consistent
 ACTION: T.Bray, to XML-i-fy the spec
 CONSENSUS: Express the material in section 4 in algorithms
End Forwarded Text ----
Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst      mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-DSig Co-Chair   http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 3 June 1999 08:00:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:31 UTC