- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 22:04:02 +0100
- To: public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org
Minutes from our meeting on 2007-12-18 were approved and are
available online here:
http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html
A text version is included below the .signature.
--
Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
[1]W3C
XML Security Specifications Maintenance Working Group Teleconference
18 Dec 2007
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log, [4]member-confidential full minutes
Attendees
Present
Frederick_Hirsch, Thomas, pdatta, rdmiller, sean, PHB, klanz2,
Hal, Ed_Simon, jcc, Shivaram
Regrets
Bruce, Rich
Chair
Frederick Hirsch
Scribe
PHB2, tlr
Contents
* [5]Topics
1. [6]Approval of Minutes
2. [7]Interop and Test Cases
3. [8]Implementation Report
4. [9]XML Signature
5. [10]Chartering
* [11]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________________
<fjh> Agenda:
[12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
025.html
<fjh> ScribeNick: PHB2
<fjh> Agenda:
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
025.html
<fjh> public minutes
[14]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes-public.html
Approval of minutes...
<tlr> ups, I didn't actually announce them to the list
<fjh> member only [15]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes.html
<tlr> [16]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes.html
[17]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes-public.html
<tlr> RESOLUTION: minutes approved, barring objections by e-mail before
tomorrow
RESOLUTION: Minutes approved unless objection by email received by end
of day
<fjh> WG Charter extended to 31 March
We share redline with XML core
fjh: XML core has sent some replies to our comments asking if they have
satisfied concerns ... response appears to be yes,
<fjh>
[18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
014.html
Did we address change about reverting language that was confusing at
the interop?
FH: We need to answer yes asap in order to let them go to PR does
anyone need more time, is silence consent? lets go through them all and
do one resolution. Second one was base language, third removing a table
and replacing with ours
FH: Resolution: approve the changes
<fjh> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: WG agrees to respond "yes" to XML Core on
three comment disposition requests
<fjh> RESOLUTION: WG agrees to respond "yes" to XML Core on three
comment disposition requests noted in agenda
<fjh> Agenda:
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
025.html
Interop and Test Cases
FH: is this work complete, does Juan Carlos want time for review?
Juan Carlos: have not had a chance, give me an action,
<fjh> ACTION: jcc review test case naming changes and updated test case
document [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-123 - Review test case naming changes and
updated test case document [on Juan Carlos Cruellas - due 2007-12-25].
FH: don't want to load you if you are busy
<fjh>
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
009.html
FH: next item, my editorial comments on test cases and stuff can we
assign this as an action to an editor(s)
Sean: can assign to me
<Zakim> tlr, you wanted to ask if we aim to go for another round of
polishing and creation of a WG Note
tlr: looking through interop do at least two thirds the way to
something we might want to publish more broadly. Would editors be
willing to take time to make a formal WG note to preserve test cases
etc. for posterity etc.
Konrad: I can help there, just need a concrete target defined
<jcc> yes, make a resolution....
FH: should we make a resolution to turn into a note?
tlr: first decision point is to decide we want to, then second point to
request publication of a particular version.
<fjh> Proposed RESOLUTION: WG would like to make test case document a
W3C Note, formal decision later
<klanz2> +1
<jcc> +1
<fjh> RESOLUTION: WG would like to make test case document a W3C Note,
formal decision later
<shivaram> +1
+1
<fjh> ACTION: Sean Review and implement changes noted in
[22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
009.html [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-124 - Review and implement changes noted
in
[24]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
009.html [on Sean Mullan - due 2007-12-25].
FH: need some other stuff done, link anchors in the document to allow
references into it.
tlr: another thing for sean and me to think about
<fjh> ACTION: tlr to update test cases document with anchors to enable
links from implementation reports [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-125 - Update test cases document with
anchors to enable links from implementation reports [on Thomas Roessler
- due 2007-12-25].
<tlr> Konrad, Juan Carlos, Sean volunteer to work on this.
FH: what to do with use cases, best thing is for JC to review it
JC: ok I will do that
<fjh>
[26]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/interop/xmldsig/c14n11/report.html
FH: next topic implementation report.
Implementation Report
FH: mostly green only two entries are yellow
JC: are they the new tasks (yes)
FH: we need to do the one for signature as well and for canon 1.1 we
need to update that implementation report so that the tests left are
linked, is this all with you or is it for the WG to make it happen?
tlr: need links into the test cases and explanatory text, dont expect
that much volume, not critical
Konrad: can we do a diff version
<fjh> Konrad: diff of test cases document possible
tlr: it is not a property of the style sheet, is possible but if it is
critical can do it but easier to do a changelog if thats OK
FH: if you can help please send contribs to the list
... NEXT TOPIC
XML Signature
<fjh> Namespace document update proposal in the agenda, discussed last
week
<tlr> ups
FH: RFC 2723, RFC2986 issues, XML schema references former not latter,
we are not blocked on this, we have language that deals with this
appropriately, we don't need XML signature to be fixed
FH: we don't require XML data types to reference latest URI RFC we are
OK because we have the appropriate language in our spec
FH: we don't have a problem
<fjh> [27]http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-URI
tlr: Part of the change we are proposing to 4431 is change to schema
types right? But you better perform that escaping
... Would be prettier situation if the thing was to reference 3986 but
don't know practical difference
FH: OK so not a problem
<fjh> ACTION: tlr check consistency of 4.3.3.1 and references [recorded
in [28]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-126 - Check consistency of 4.3.3.1 and
references [on Thomas Roessler - due 2007-12-25].
Chartering
The group discussed the relationship of the proposed charter text to
both the proposed derived key work item, and to standards work in other
bodies that is layered on top of XML Signature. The group decided to
keep the details of this discussion member-confidential. The
discussion's resulted in an action item and a resolution:
<tlr ACTION: tlr to propose change to charter draft that opens
encryption, in a limited way [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-127 - Propose change to charter draft that
opens encryption, in a limited way [on Thomas Roessler - due
2007-12-25].
<fjh> RESOLUTION: Group believes charter draft is broad enough to allow
chartered WG to address derived key or other use case concerns and not
need to explicitly call out examination of other stds work
Full details are available from the [30]member-confidential full
minutes.
<fjh> action-122 closed
<trackbot-ng> ACTION-122 Propose concrete edit to proposed charter to
deal with encryption / derived specs closed
<klanz2> Happy Holidays, and a happy new year ...
<EdSimon> Happy New Year everyone
<tlr> happy holidays etc
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: jcc review test case naming changes and updated test case
document [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: sean Review and implement changes noted in
[32]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0
009.html [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: tlr check consistency of 4.3.3.1 and references [recorded
in [34]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: tlr to propose change to charter draft that opens
encryption, in a limited way [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: tlr to update test cases document with anchors to enable
links from implementation reports [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version 1.128
([38]CVS log)
$Date: 2008/01/08 21:02:06 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0025.html
3. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes
5. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#agenda
6. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#minutes
7. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#item01
8. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#item02
9. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#item03
10. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#item04
11. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html#ActionSummary
12. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0025.html
13. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0025.html
14. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes-public.html
15. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes.html
16. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes.html
17. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-xmlsec-minutes-public.html
18. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0014.html
19. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0025.html
20. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01
21. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0009.html
22. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0009.html
23. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02
24. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0009.html
25. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03
26. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/interop/xmldsig/c14n11/report.html
27. http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#sec-URI
28. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04
29. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05
30. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html
31. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01
32. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0009.html
33. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02
34. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04
35. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05
36. http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03
37. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
38. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 8 January 2008 21:04:07 UTC