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

Re: Moving Canonical XML along

From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 21:34:13 +0000
To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E144rdF-000274-00@yog-sothoth>

Hi,

It is probably valid to fill in Y1 down the table for Baltimore.

We are somewhat processor agnostic, however the conformance tests
that we provide do verify all listed requirements of the processor
in use.

Merlin

r/reagle@w3.org/2000.12.08/15:14:00
>
>The Call for Implementaion Period for Canonical XML closed on November 24th. 
>An InformationalRFC as well as a new Candidate Rec (for consideration for 
>Proposed Rec) is being prepared. Changes made include those resulting from 
>comments [1,2,3], no change was made with respect to [4].
>
>However, in order to successfully advance it to Proposed Rec, it'd be good 
>in we could fill in some of the gaps in the interop-report [5]. (Petteri and 
>Merlin, can you report on the list the status of your implementations with 
>respect to these questions about the parsers treatment of encoding and 
>relative URIs?)
>
>[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000OctDec/0094.html
>[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000OctDec/0196.html
>[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000OctDec/0208.html
>[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000OctDec/0163.html
>[5] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/10/10-c14n-interop.html
>
>__
>Joseph Reagle Jr.
>W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
>IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
>
Received on Saturday, 9 December 2000 16:34:49 GMT

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