RE: Publication Request: First Public Working Draft of C14N 1.1and two WG Notes

Ian,

I believe we still need a response from you about whether it
is okay for the FPWD of C14N 1.1 to be a "review copy" with 
diffs marked.

More comments below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian B. Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org] 
> Sent: Monday, 2006 September 11 22:06
> To: Grosso, Paul
> Cc: Jean-Guilhem Rouel; webreq; Liam Quin; Philippe Le 
> Hegaret; Henry S. Thompson; public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Publication Request: First Public Working Draft 
> of C14N 1.1and two WG Notes
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Please publish these as "Working Drafts" until you are all done, at
> which point publish them as Working Group Notes. Please state your
> expectations in the status section: that the WG expects to 
> publish this
> as a Note at some point.

Both notes' status section includes:

  This is the W3C First Public Working Draft....
  Once all the comments about this document will have
  been addressed, the Working Group intends to publish
  a final version of this document as a W3C Working Group Note.

so I believe we have already done as Ian requests.

> 
> "Working Draft" does not (for historical reasons) imply 
> "going to Rec."

Then the pubrules checker should be fixed in this regard.

paul

> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
>  _ Ian
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 17:07 -0400, Grosso, Paul wrote:
> >  
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jean-Guilhem Rouel [mailto:jean-gui@w3.org] 
> > > Sent: Monday, 2006 September 11 15:49
> > > To: Grosso, Paul
> > > Cc: webreq; Liam Quin; Philippe Le Hegaret; Henry S. 
> > > Thompson; public-xml-core-wg@w3.org; Ian B. Jacobs
> > > Subject: Re: Publication Request: First Public Working Draft 
> > > of C14N 1.1 and two WG Notes
> > > 
> > > Hi Paul,
> > > 
> > > It's OK for me, but I CC Ian to have his opinion.
> > > BTW, I don't really understand the status of the two 
> other documents.
> > > You say that they are notes (so do the URIs), but the documents
> > > themselves are written as Working Draft. This is not 
> normal and that's
> > > why the errors are raised. Maybe Ian can confirm that (I can 
> > > be wrong),
> > > but I think this is a problem and thus has to be changed.
> > > 
> > 
> > I await Ian's comments.
> > 
> > These documents are WG Notes (not Rec-track), but they
> > aren't final yet.  So they are working drafts of WG Notes.
> > 
> > I await to hear how we're supposed to handle these.
> > 
> > paul
> > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Jean-Gui
> > > 
> > > Grosso, Paul a écrit :
> > > > Hi Jean-Gui,
> > > > 
> > > > The XML Core WG would like to publish just that diff
> > > > document for the first public working draft.  It's
> > > > important that reviewers can see just what we are
> > > > proposing to change.  At this point, we do not have
> > > > a more "real" document.
> > > > 
> > > > We will, of course, have a "real" document for
> > > > subsequent drafts, but for now this is what we
> > > > hope to publish this week.
> > > > 
> > > > I hope this is okay with you.
> > > > 
> > > > thanks,
> > > > 
> > > > paul 
> > > > 
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: Jean-Guilhem Rouel [mailto:jean-gui@w3.org] 
> > > >> Sent: Monday, 2006 September 11 10:55
> > > >> To: Grosso, Paul
> > > >> Cc: webreq; Liam Quin; Philippe Le Hegaret; Henry S. 
> > > >> Thompson; public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> > > >> Subject: Re: Publication Request: First Public Working Draft 
> > > >> of C14N 1.1 and two WG Notes
> > > >>
> > > >> Hello Paul,
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/09/WD-xml-c14n11-20060915.htm
> > > >> l is only
> > > >> a diff document. Can you provide the real document?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thank you,
> > > >> Jean-Gui
> > > >>
> > > >> Grosso, Paul a écrit :
> > > >>> The XML Core WG requests publication of the following 
> > > >>> three documents:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
> > > >>>   Known Issues with Canonical XML 1.0 (C14N/1.0)
> > > >>> http://www.w3.org/2006/04/c14n-note/c14n-note.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
> > > >>>   Using XML Digital Signatures in the 2006 XML Environment
> > > >>> http://www.w3.org/2006/04/c14n-note/dsig2006-note.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * First WD of the Recommendation track:
> > > >>>   Canonical XML 1.1
> > > >>> 
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/09/WD-xml-c14n11-20060915.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The above URLs are the publication-ready versions as of 
> > > >>> 2006 September 8, but dated September 15th in anticipation
> > > >>> of publication at that time.  
> > > >>>
> > > >>> They are written to be published by being copied as-is into 
> > > >>> the following locations:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
> > > >>>   Known Issues with Canonical XML 1.0 (C14N/1.0)
> > > >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-C14N-20060915/Overview.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
> > > >>>   Using XML Digital Signatures in the 2006 XML Environment
> > > >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-DSIG2006-20060915/Overview.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * First WD of the Recommendation track:
> > > >>>   Canonical XML 1.1
> > > >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20060915/Overview.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The Director approved publication in an email sent
> > > >>> Thu 2006-09-07 17:20 EDT cc-ing webreq (but not
> > > >>> archived in any archive to which I have permission).
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The two Notes pass pubrules except for errors because
> > > >>> pubrules thinks they are WDs of Rec-track documents
> > > >>> instead of WDs of Notes.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The WD passes pubrules.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Paul Grosso for the XML Core WG
> > > 
> -- 
> Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
>

Received on Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:20:32 UTC