W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2000

Fwd: Canonical XML Last Call

From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 17:33:26 +0900
Message-Id: <>
To: www-international@w3.org
Dear members of the www-international list,

We just received notice that the XML Canonicalization
specification worked on by the joint W3C/IETF XML Digital
Signature WG has been put to last call.

Please have a look at this specification and send
comments to this list (so that they can be
discussed and included in the W3C I18N WG/IGs
response to this last call).

Many thanks in advance,     Martin.

>From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>

>  The Canonical XML specification is entering its second last call. Last Call
>ends July 28th. (The XML Signature WG has a FTF meeting the next week).
>While there was a last call by the XML Syntax WG at the beginning of the
>year, this last call is needed for the following reasons:
>  1. This version is produced by the XML Signature WG.
>  2. This version has been adapted to use the approach of using the XPath
>data model to serialize XML data.
>  3. Consequently,  much of the XPath serialization text that was present in
>the Signature specification has been moved to the Canonical XML
>  I believe that we've addressed most of the issues raised by the I18N WG
>material to XML serialization that were raised during the Signature
>specification Last Call. I hope this last call will serve a useful check
>point to further (1) tease apart the Signature and C14N specifications
>issues, and (2) (redundantly) ensure that those issues which may have
>transferred to the C14N specification are addressed.
>  Those WG's invited to review this specification include:
>  1. XML Query
>  2. XML Core
>  3. I18N
>  __
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710
>  Abstract
>     This specification describes a method for generating a physical
>     representation, the canonical form, of an input XML document, that
>     does not vary under syntactic variations of the input that are defined
>     to be logically equivalent by the XML 1.0 Recommendation [16][XML]. If
>     an XML document is changed by an application, but its Canonical-XML
>     form has not changed, then the changed document and the original
>     document are considered equivalent for the purposes of many
>     applications. This document does not establish a method such that two
>     XML documents are equivalent if and only if their canonical forms are
>     identical.
>       [16] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#XML
>  Status of this document
>     This is the second Last Call of the Canonical XML specification and
>     the third draft of an alternative approach to the first [17](20000119)
>     Last Call. The Last Call ends on July 28, 2000. (See [18]proposal and
>     resolved thread to go to last call.) This specification differs from
>     the first Last Call in that it (1) uses the XPath [19][XPath] data
>     model, and (2) includes a few substantive changes that affect the
>     canonical serialization of an XML document. It is not necessary for
>     implementations to use XPath to generate the canonical form of an XML
>     document. XPath simply provides a data model that is simplified
>     compared to InfoSet, yet sufficient for the purpose of
>     canonicalization. XPath also provides an expression syntax for
>     describing the desired portion of a whole document. Any variances
>     between that result from this specification's use of the XPath
>     [20][XPath] data model and the XML Information Set [[21]InfoSet] will
>     be reported to the XML Information Set's comments list.
>       [17] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000119.html
>       [18]
>       [19] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#XPath
>       [20] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#XPath
>       [21] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#Infoset
>     Prior versions of this document were published by the [22]XML Core
>     Working Group (the last of which was the [23]20000119 Last Call),
>     which delegated the completion of this specification to the IETF/W3C
>     [24]XML Signature Working Group.
>       [22] http://www.w3.org/XML/Activity#core-wg
>       [23] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000119.html
>       [24] http://www.w3.org/Signature/
>     The XML Signature and XML WGs and other interested parties are invited
>     to comment on this proposed direction, review the specification and
>     report implementation experience. While we welcome implementation
>     experience reports, the XML Signature Working Group will not allow
>     early implementation to constrain its ability to make changes to this
>     specification.
>     Please send comments to the editors and cc: the list
>     <[25]w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>. Publication as a Working Draft does not
>     imply endorsement by the W3C membership or IESG. It is inappropriate
>     to cite W3C Drafts as other than "work in progress." A list of current
>     W3C working drafts can be found at [26]http://www.w3.org/TR/. Current
>     IETF drafts can be found at
>     [27]http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html.
>       [25] mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
>       [26] http://www.w3.org/TR/
>       [27] http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
>     There have been no declarations regarding patents related to this
>     specification within the Signature WG.
>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 Wednesday, 12 July 2000 05:01:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:20 UTC