RE: Transition Request: PR Request for Canonical XML 1.1

[Removed webreq and w3t-comm from the recipient list.]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Bratt [mailto:steve@w3.org] 
> Sent: Monday, 2008 January 07 12:02
> To: Grosso, Paul
> Cc: timbl@w3.org; public-xml-core-wg@w3.org; webreq@w3.org; 
> chairs@w3.org; w3t-comm@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Transition Request: PR Request for Canonical XML 1.1
> 
> HI Paul.
> 
> Thanks for this request, and sorry for not responding sooner 
> (just back from holidays)...
> 
> Please go ahead and schedule the call.  Answers to my 
> question in-line below would be appreciated before the call, 
> if possible.  Everything else looks clear and OK.

Hi Steve,

Regarding:

> sb -- lots of changes in Sec 2.4 and in the appendix since 
> CR.  Could you please summarize the nature and reason for 
> these?  Are they non-normative?

None of these changes are changes to how C14N 1.1 should work; 
rather, these are changes in how we explain things in the spec.  
So, while the changes to 2.4 are "normative", they are effectively 
"editorial".  These changes were all suggested by the XML Security 
Specifications Maintenance Working Group and the implementors of 
the CR version of the C14N 1.1 spec to make the spec clearer.  

Any text from the CR version of the Appendix that was necessary
to retain the same normative meaning as before has been moved
into section 2.4, and the PR version of the Appendix now provides 
a list of examples and how they should be normalized when the rules 
described in the body of the spec are followed.  This was suggested 
by the implementors as a way to help ensure that readers of the spec 
understood some of the special cases addressed by the body of the spec. 

These changes were in response to Comment 2c shown in
the Disposition of Comments document [1].  This comment [2]
outlined the very helpful suggestions that arose from the
interoperability testing that was done during the CR period,
and the rewording of section 2.4 and the examples for the
Appendix mostly came from--and have since been vetted by--the
XML Security Specifications Maintenance Working Group and the 
CR period implementors.

paul

[1] http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/12/CR-c14n11-doc.html
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-canonicalization-comments/20
07Oct/0000

Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 18:31:16 UTC