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

991209 minutes

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:42:36 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991209174236.00a192a0@localhost>
To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Signature/Minutes/991209-tele.html

                     [1]IETF [2]W3C   [3]XML Signature WG

      [1] http://www.ietf.org/
      [2] http://www.w3.org/
      [3] http://www.w3.org/Signature/Overview.html

  99-December-09
  Chairs: Donald Eastlake and Joseph Reagle
  Note Taker: Joseph Reagle [[4]ascii]

      [4] http://www.w3.org/Signature/Minutes/991209-tele,text

Participants

     * Donald Eastlake 3rd, IBM
     * Joseph Reagle, W3C
     * Mark Bartel, JetForm
     * Ed Simon , Entrust Technologies Inc.
     * John Boyer, UWI
     * Peter Lipp,
     * Todd Vincent, GSU
     * David Solo, Citigroup
     * Richard Himes, US District Court of New Mexico

  Review of Outstanding Action Items

     * ...

    Status of documents < 5 minutes

   Requirements: pending IESG advancement to Informational RFC.

   Post a Core version this week to WG page, then hopefully another one
   that addresses any SignedInfo syntactical changes as a pseudo
   proposal.

    Signature Syntax & Processing draft questions:

     * Transforms and Node Sets
          + conversation resulting from Kent and Boyer on "the output of
            the this transform is a new XML document" -> the output of
            the XPath transform is a node set, string, boolean, or
            number. Boyer will send text to replace present text.
          + if you want text, then you must call the function 'string()'
          + XMLSig needs to define an order of attributes (and
            namespaces). Boyer will send text on how xmlns are ordered.
     * John is asking for a [5]validate attribute.
          + Solo: need a very mechanistic and non-variant way to do deal
            with the signature over actual content referenced in the
            core: sign one or more things, if it comes back as valid,
            they all come back. References in the core signature that
            allow objects to change and come back as valid is an absurd
            premise. The core references' content can't change.
          + [Reagle gets caught in conversation and doesn't take good
            notes.]
          + No concensus to introduce validate attribute.
     * [6]Eastlake's Syntax Proposal
          + Call discusses Don's proposal though most haven't had a
            chance to look at it closely. Generally people are
            comfortable with grouping ObjectReferences in a Manifest
            other things (like Object and SignedProperties) need more
            discussion.
          + Reagle: Discuss proposal on list. After a weeks conversation,
            Don should try to represent his proposal as a variant spec.
            By 12/21 have a sense of what changes if any WG is
            comfortable with. Once we've made those decisions public a
            draft. In January begin producing functionality FAQ (How do I
            sign the KeyInfo, how do I create a location indepedent
            signature) using stable syntax as a way to mediate WG last
            call. And use stable syntax to write examples for rough
            interop testing.

      [5]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/1999OctDec/0438.html
      [6]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/1999OctDec/0444.html

    Face to Face meeting arrangements < 10 minutes

     * Meeting is in SanJose on the 21st, further logistics should
       follow.




_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 9 December 1999 17:42:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:08 GMT