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

Yes.

 _ Ian

On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 10:29 -0400, Jean-Guilhem Rouel wrote:
> Ian B. Jacobs a écrit :
> > 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.
> 
> So the URLs should be
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-C14N-20060915/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-DSIG2006-20060915/Overview.html
> rather than
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-C14N-20060915/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-DSIG2006-20060915/Overview.html
> Am I right?
> 
> Regards,
> Jean-Gui
> 
> > "Working Draft" does not (for historical reasons) imply "going to Rec."
> > 
> > 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