W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > October 2002

Updated XKMS Issues List

From: Mike Just <Mike.Just@entrust.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 14:04:32 -0400
Message-ID: <9A4F653B0A375841AC75A8D17712B9C90257AC6C@sottmxs04.entrust.com>
To: www-xkms@w3.org
Cc: "Stephen Farrell (E-mail)" <stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie>, "Shivaram Mysore (E-mail)" <Shivaram.Mysore@sun.com>, "'Philip Hallam-Baker' (E-mail)" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Here is the latest update to the XKMS Issues List.  I believe I've covered
everything (except I haven't gotten to Shivaram's latest email to the list
from Oct 1st - sorry Shivaram!).  Apologies if I've missed anything. The
changes I made are listed below.

Outstanding Issues (as discussed at Oct 1st telecon):
- Moved Issue 16 to Resolved.
- Split Issue 20 so that Issue 20 now addresses the redesign of <Status>
while new Issue 69 deals with separation of <KeyBinding> along <Locate> and
<Validate>.  Both now resolved based on schema proposed by Phill. Added
Issue 70 so that text would be added to explain how a client should process
new <Status>.
- Issues 22 & 23 kept open as a final resolution was not achieved on the
Telecon.
- Added new Issue 71, to be completed when at final draft, for a section to
be added to indicate what it means for a client or service to be "XKMS
conformant".
- Kept Issue 30 as open. 
- Moved Issue 31 to Resolved.
- Kept Issue 32 open.
- Moved Issue 34 to Resolved (though the suggested change will not be
performed).
- Kept Issue 61 as open until the proposal by Stephen to remove is accepted
on the mailing list. 

I've included new requirements resulting from Frederick's review against the
Requirements doc (creating new issues 72-87).

I've included new requirements resulting from Joseph's keyword audit
(89-97).

I've also moved Issue 26 to Resolved (RSA IPR issue), based on Peter's email
on Sept 13th and Issue 13 to Resolved (SRV records) based on Joseph's email
of Sept 24th.

The following minor issues were moved to Resolved. If someone objects to
this classification, they can be re-opened.
2, 3, 8, 10, 12, 14, 24, 36, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 48, 52, 57, 59, 60,
62.
 
I've also added links to proposed solutions posted to the list (mainly by
Phill) for issues whose state has not changed. 

Cheers,
Mike

 




Received on Monday, 7 October 2002 14:05:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:40 UTC