- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 21:55:59 +0200
- To: public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org
Thanks to Phill for the scribing and clean-up. I've updated the
online version here:
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes
Regards,
--
Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
----- Forwarded message from Phillip Hallam-Baker -----
To: tlr@w3.org, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 14:00:04 -0400
Subject: Minutes
X-Spam-Level:
X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5
[1]W3C
XML Security Spec Maintenance WG
22 May 2007
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
EdSimon, Thomas, +1.617.876.aaaa, sean, Hal_Lockhart, +1.410.695.aabb,
rmiller3, GregWhitehead, R_Salz, jcc, PHB, [IBMCambridge], klanz2
Regrets
FrederickHirsch, GilesHogben, AlekseySanin, PeterLipp
Chair
tlr
Scribe
phb
Contents
· [4]Topics
1. [5]convene, administrivia
2. [6]last meeting's minutes
3. [7]action item review
4. [8]workshop planning
5. [9]Status of drafts: C14N11 (from XML Core)
6. [10]Status of drafts: DSig Core
· [11]Summary of Action Items
______________________________________________________________________
<tlr> Date: 22 May 2007
<tlr> scribe: phb
<tlr> agendum 2=last meeting's minutes
<tlr> agendum 3= action item review
<tlr> hi greg
<grw> hi
<tlr> interesting
<tlr> ScribeNick: hal
convene, administrivia
last meeting's minutes
resolution: next meeting May 29
<tlr> [12]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-xmlsec-minutes
resolution: minutes accepted
action item review
<tlr> ACTION-5 closed
<trackbot-ng> Sorry... I don't know how to close ACTION yet
<tlr> ACTION-6 continued; Konrad absent
<tlr> ACTION-22 done
<tlr> ACTION-26 continue
workshop planning
<tlr> [13]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/ws/cfp.html
<jcc> q
jcc: noticed typo what would be the limits on number of people from each
org?
tlr: if we have excessive numbers we will limit attendance... standard
escape hatch hope to close cfp as soon as possible final closure in 2 weeks
<scribe> ScribeNick: PHB2
ACTION: hal to propose additional types of contributions for workshop CFP
[recorded in [14]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-28 - Propose additional types of contributions
for workshop CFP [on Hal Lockhart - due 2007-05-29].
<tlr> [15]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40279/workshop-timing/results
Tlr: Timeline for the workshop, form open, Sept 25-27 days where no known
conflicts aim for that
proposal 25,26 Tues and Wed
(no objections)
jcc: : may be an issue regarding availability of hotels
Thomas: ok don't do catalonia Do meeting of follow-up group Keep offer in
grateful consideration for the followup work sometime next year
Thomas: should we do east or west coast? takeup Hal's offer
Hal: given likely number of participants, any likely issues?
Thomas: given number of attewndees (40+) consider AV support
<tlr> ACTION: thomas to go through hosting requirements with Hal [recorded
in [16]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-29 - Go through hosting requirements with Hal
[on Thomas Roessler - due 2007-05-29].
Thomas: next steps need to discuss chair, have candidates, need approval
from W3C management
Thomas: Once approved everyone must send in a position paper (inc. members)
Participation is open to broad community, not just W3C
<tlr> ACTION: thomas to propose detailed timeline for CFP by mail [recorded
in [17]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-30 - Propose detailed timeline for CFP by mail
[on Thomas Roessler - due 2007-05-29].
HAL: Is there a special protocol for members?
Thomas: no everyone must submit a paper
Status of drafts: C14N11 (from XML Core)
<tlr>
[18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0028.h
tml
<tlr>
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0040
Thomas: status of CR-Recommendation from XML-Core ... good time to raise
issues
EdSimon: In the minutes we said we don't expect to give further feedback to
XMLCore, this is respect to C14N 1.1 item
Thomas: yes, this is the case ... no extensive discussion on 1.1 C18N other
issues are open
Status of drafts: DSig Core
<tlr> [20]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/
Progress issue, 3 months after CR status and 2 interoperable implementations
<tlr> [21]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/changes.html
<EdS> c18n should be c14n
Need to walk through draft once more to see that people are OK with changes
that have taken place
<tlr>
[22]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-CoreGeneration
<tlr> The Reference Processing Model (section 4.3.3.2) requires that
validators use Canonical XML 1.0 [XML-C14N] when a transformation that would
expect an octet-stream as input is applied to a node-set. We RECOMMEND that
generators do not rely on this default behavior, but explicitly identify the
transformation that is applied to perform this mapping. In cases in which
inclusive canonicalization is desired, we RECOMMEND that Canonical XML 1.1
[XML-C14N11] be used.
jcc: if an operation is applied on the input, it is not applied to the node
set,
thomas: replace applied to a node set with better wording
<tlr> "is applied to a node-set" -> "would be applied to a nodeset"?
<tlr> The Reference Processing Model (section 4.3.3.2) requires that
validators use Canonical XML 1.0 [XML-C14N] when a transformation that would
expect an octet-stream as input is applied to a node-set.
Thomas: can everyone live with that
<tlr> The Reference Processing Model (section 4.3.3.2) requires that
validators use Canonical XML 1.0 [XML-C14N] when a transformation that would
expect an octet-stream as input +++ WOULD BE +++ applied to a node-set.
Thomas: the point being that the transformation cannot be applied to the
node set
<jcc> would expecte an octet-stream as input receives a node-set
jcc: not quite
Thomas: propose wordsmithing change to the mailing list.
Thomas is the normative intent of this change acceptable?
<tlr> ACTION: jcc to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
sentence on mailing list [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - jcc
<tlr> ACTION: juan-carlos to propose rewording of "Reference processing
model" sentence on mailing list [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - juan-carlos
<tlr> ACTION: cruellas to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
sentence on mailing list [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-31 - Propose rewording of \"Reference
processing model\" sentence on mailing list [on Juan Carlos Cruellas - due
2007-05-29].
<tlr> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: normative changes in 3.1.1 agreed
sean: first time validator and generator used in text, should be defined?
Thomas (explains terms)
sean: fine with the terms, just should we put in a definitio
hal: hard to see how can have a recomendation without an actor, will someone
take a recomendation?
Thomas: sean will you volunteer?
Sean: give it a shot
<tlr> ACTION: sean to propose language for "validator" and "generator" that
is more in line with rest of rec's style [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-32 - Propose language for \"validator\" and
\"generator\" that is more in line with rest of rec\'s style [on Sean Mullan
- due 2007-05-29].
<tlr>
[27]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-RetrievalMethod
<tlr>
[28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0006.h
tml
<tlr> "For example, a reference that results in the digesting of an |Object|
element containing a |SignatureProperties| element is still of type
|#Object|"
thomas: current languahge in 4.4.3
<klanz2> sorry for being late
thomas: proposal from greg whitehead to add above
<tlr>
[29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.h
tml
red text agreed in cambridge, greg proposes adding text
hal: makes it a lot clearer nothing like a good for example
Thomas: propose accepting change
(confusion as to where we are)
Proposal is to change 4.3.3.1
<tlr> [30]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-URI
Greg: proposal was to change text, was refining JCC's proposal
<tlr> PROPOSED change: "For example, a reference that identifies an Object
element containing a SignatureProperties element is still of type #Object."
-> "For example, a reference that results in the digesting of an |Object|
element containing a |SignatureProperties| element is still of type
|#Object|"
<tlr> RESOLUTION: proposed edit from
[31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.h
tml
Thomas: test case, any news?
Question about 19
Konrad: havent done up to now, should not be too hard should be done today
<tlr> ACTION-19 hopefully closed today
<tlr> E01 remains unresolved
Thomas: Changes to e05 agreed? As are ?? changes to the schema confirming
proposed normative changes
jcc: issue with the change
thomas: its a browser issue will change the formatting to make it readable
<tlr> ACTION: thomas to change formatting of 4.4.3 note [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-33 - Change formatting of 4.4.3 note [on Thomas
Roessler - due 2007-05-29].
<tlr> [33]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg
thomas: c14n algorithms
<tlr> This specification REQUIRES implementation of both Canonical XML 1.0
[XML-C14N] and Canonical XML 1.1 [XML-C14N11]. We RECOMMEND that generators
chose Canonical XML 1.1 [XML-C14N11] when inclusive canonicalizatoin is
desired.
people please review and approve this text
<tlr> sean: fix canonicalizatoin to canonicalization!
jcc: query resolution
thomas: clarify
... 6.5.2, (describe changes)
... identifiers left open for now renew identifier proposed for last call or
come up with a new one if the text changes may need new identifier,
otherwise reuse old one
<tlr> ACTION: konrad to verify that CR version of C14N11 has no
conformance-affecting changes against
[34]http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/ [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-34 - Verify that CR version of C14N11 has no
conformance-affecting changes against
[36]http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/ [on Konrad Lanz - due
2007-05-29].
jcc: request clarification
thomas: describe changes to note in 6.5.2, grammar changes only
<tlr> ed simon: move note above 6.5.1
<tlr> so resolved
<tlr> [37]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg
<tlr> Note: The Reference Generation Model (section 3.1.1) includes further
restrictions on the reliance of implicitly defined default transformations
by signature generators.
<tlr> of -> upon
<klanz2> btw. : CR
[38]http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2007/05/CR-xml-c14n11-20070509
Thomas: ok everyone? nobody objects? ... done with the agenda
adjorned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: cruellas to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
sentence on mailing list [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: hal to propose additional types of contributions for workshop
CFP [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: jcc to propose rewording of "Reference processing model"
sentence on mailing list [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: juan-carlos to propose rewording of "Reference processing
model" sentence on mailing list [recorded in
[42]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: konrad to verify that CR version of C14N11 has no
conformance-affecting changes against
[43]http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/ [recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: sean to propose language for "validator" and "generator" that
is more in line with rest of rec's style [recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: thomas to change formatting of 4.4.3 note [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: thomas to go through hosting requirements with Hal [recorded
in [47]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: thomas to propose detailed timeline for CFP by mail [recorded
in [48]http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]
______________________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [49]scribe.perl version 1.128 ([50]CVS
log)
$Date: 2007/05/22 14:07:43 $
______________________________________________________________________
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0034.html
3. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-irc
4. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#agenda
5. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item01
6. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item02
7. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item03
8. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item04
9. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item05
10. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#item06
11. file://localhost/home/roessler/.tmp/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#ActionSummary
12. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-xmlsec-minutes
13. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/ws/cfp.html
14. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01
15. http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40279/workshop-timing/results
16. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02
17. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03
18. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0028.html
19. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0040
20. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/
21. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/changes.html
22. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-CoreGeneration
23. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04
24. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05
25. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06
26. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07
27. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-RetrievalMethod
28. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0006.html
29. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.html
30. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-URI
31. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007May/0011.html
32. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08
33. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg
34. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/
35. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09
36. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/
37. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-c14nAlg
38. http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2007/05/CR-xml-c14n11-20070509
39. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06
40. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01
41. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04
42. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05
43. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20061220/
44. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action09
45. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action07
46. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action08
47. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02
48. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03
49. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
50. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Wednesday, 23 May 2007 19:56:18 UTC