- From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:08:45 -0400
- To: ext Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-xmlsec@w3.org
to this list of WG products I would add: XML Signature RNG Schema XML Signature Errata XML Encryption Errata C14N Errata Coordination I think it is worth separating errata work from producing new maintenance editions. I suggest we rename as follows, to have shorter names in case that works with tracker irc interface better, so list short (wordy) Rqmts (XML Signature and Canonicalization V Next Requirements) Sig (Design for XML Signature V Next) C14n (Design for Canonicalization V Next) Enc (XML Encryption V Next) BestPractices (XML Signature Best Practices) RNGSchema (XML Signature, 1st and 2nd Edition RNG Schema) C14NErrata (C14N Errata) SigErrata (XML Signature Errata) EncErrata (XML Encryption Errata) Coordination (WG Coordination issues) 2ndSig (XML Signature Syntax and Processing Maintenance) 1stEnc (XML Encryption Syntax and Processing Maintenance) C14N10 (Canonical XML 1.0 Maintenance) C14N11(Canonical XML 1.1 Maintenance) ExC14N (Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0 Maintenance) DTransform (Decryption Tranform for XML Signature Maintenance) Looks like a large number of products... regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Jul 17, 2008, at 11:05 AM, ext Thomas Roessler wrote: > I'd propose we keep the following substantive products starting up: > > - XML Signature and Canonicalization V Next Requirements > - Design for XML Signature V Next > - Design for Canonicalization V Next > - XML Encryption V Next > - XML Signature Best Practices > > Maintenance deliverables: > > - XML Signature Syntax and Processing > - XML Encryption Syntax and Processing > - Canonical XML 1.0 > - Canonical XML 1.1 > - Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0 > - Decryption Tranform for XML Signature > > In terms of editing work, I suspect that it's not worth moving the > maintenance deliverables to xmlspec. It will be worth moving C14N > and Signature to xmlspec once we know what shape these deliverables > take. > > I also propose that we use xmlspec for the Requirements. > > Regards, > -- > Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org> +33-4-89063488
Received on Monday, 21 July 2008 21:09:54 UTC