Re: XMLSec comments and recommended changes to C14N11 specification

For the record, the Working Group is (obviously) pleased with the
resolution. :)

Cheers,
-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>






On 2007-05-16 10:48:04 -0400, Glenn Marcy wrote:
> From: Glenn Marcy <gmarcy@us.ibm.com>
> To: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
> Cc: www-xml-canonicalization-comments@w3.org
> Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 10:48:04 -0400
> Subject: Re: XMLSec comments and  recommended changes to C14N11 specification
> List-Id: <www-xml-canonicalization-comments.w3.org>
> X-Spam-Level: 
> X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/OF54AE9928.C4023B01-ON852572DD.00510161-852572DD.00514E45@us.ibm.com
> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5
> 
> In response to your email to the Canonical XML 1.1 Last Call Working Draft
> recorded at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-canonicalization-comments/2007May/0000.html
> the XML Core WG generated, discussed, and resolved the follow issue:
> 
> Issue Hirsch-01:
> Editorial comments
> 
> Summary resolution: accepted
> 
> Response
> --------
> The WG had consensus to accept all of your comments and we have updated
> the next draft of the specification to include those changes.
> 
> ========
> 
> Please let us know whether you accept our resolution of your comment,
> or wish to have an objection formally recorded.  If we do not hear
> from you within 10 days we will assume that you accept our response
> (though we would prefer to hear from you in any case if practical).
> 
> Thank you for your interest in Canonical XML 1.1.
> 
> Glenn Marcy
> for the XML Core WG

Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2007 15:20:25 UTC