W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > October to December 2000

Call for Implementation: Canonical XML Becomes a W3C Candidate Recommendation

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 12:50:32 -0400
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001026124638.031d8c18@rpcp.mit.edu>
To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Congradulations (and thanks) to John and the Working Group!

Now I hope we can wrap up our interop report [1] over the next four weeks. 
If you would like your implementation to be listed, or can give further 
feedback on that status of your implementation with respect to empty boxes, 
please forward that information on to the list.

[1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/10/10-c14n-interop

Forwarded Text ----
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 09:26:08 -0700
From: Janet Daly <janet@w3.org>
Organization: W3C
To: no-spam-w3c-ac-members@w3.org
CC: reagle@w3.org
Subject: Call for Implementation: Canonical XML Becomes a W3C Candidate
  Recommendation


Dear W3C Advisory Committee Representative,

W3C is pleased to announce the advancement of Canonical XML to Candidate
Recommendation status.

	Canonical XML Version 1.0
	26 October 2000
	http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xml-c14n-20001026
	ed. John Boyer, <jboyer@PureEdge.com>

1 Abstract

Any XML document is part of a set of XML documents that are logically
equivalent within an application context, but which vary in physical
representation based on syntactic changes permitted by XML 1.0 [XML] and
Namespaces in XML [Names]. This specification describes a method for
generating a physical representation, the canonical form, of an XML
document that accounts for the permissible changes. Except for
limitations regarding a few unusual cases, if two documents have the
same canonical form, then the two documents are logically equivalent
within the given application context. Note that two documents may have
differing canonical forms yet still be equivalent in a given context
based on application-specific equivalence rules for which no generalized
XML specification could account.

2 Request for publication and outstanding issues

The publication of the Canonical XML Version 1.0 Candidate
Recommendation is a result of a request sent to the Director and the W3C
Chairs, archived at:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2000OctDec/0021

The XML Signature WG reports that all last call issues have been
resolved. The Canonical XML Version 1.0 Last Call Issue Report is at:

http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/09/06-c14n-last-call-issues

There were no minority objections.

Results of the initial operability report already show two independent
implementations. The interoperability report is at:

http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/10/10-c14n-interop


3 Exit criteria

The XML Signature Working Group encourages implementations during the CR
period, which ends on 24 November 2000. The XML Signature Working Group
must produce an amended version of the implementation report, taking
into account new implementations, in order to exit the Candidate
Recommendation phase, and showing that they have addressed all issues
raised during the CR period.


4 Description of what Candidate Recommendation status means

The W3C Process Document describes the Candidate Recommendation status
of a specification in Section 6.2.3:
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/tr.html#RecsCR

    Advancement of a document to Candidate Recommendation is an explicit
    call to those outside of the related Working Groups or the W3C itself
    for implementation and technical feedback.

5 Status of This Document

The "status of this document" section for the Candidate Recommendation
reads:

	This specification from the IETF/W3C XML Signature Working
	Group (W3C Activity Statement) is a Candidate Recommendation
	of the W3C. While this was originally a deliverable of the XML
	Core Working Group, completion of this specification has been
	delegated to the XML Signature Working Group.

	The XML Signature Working Group believes this specification
	incorporates the resolution of all last call issues;
	furthermore it considers the specification to be very stable
	(as demonstrated by its interoperability report) and invites
	further implementation feedback during this period. The
	duration of Candidate Recommendation will last approximately
	four weeks (November 24).

	Please send comments to the editors and cc: the list
	<w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>.

	There have been no declarations regarding patents related
	to this specification within the XML Signature Working Group.

	A list of current W3C Recommendations and other technical
	documents can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR.

For Tim Berners-Lee, Director;
Janet Daly, Head of Communcations
End Forwarded Text ----

__
Joseph Reagle Jr.
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 26 October 2000 12:50:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:11 GMT