See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 17 January 2012
<scribe> ScribeNick: fjh
fjh: Happy New Years all. Next call next week, 24 January. No call 7 February.
Approve minutes, 20 December 2011
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2011Dec/att-0037/minutes-2011-12-20.html
RESOLUTION: Minutes from 20 December 2011 are approved.
http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/#news
Last Call of "XML Encryption 1.1", "XML Encryption 1.1 CipherReference Processing using 2.0 Transforms". published 5 January 2012
FPWD of "Test Cases for XML Encryption 1.1" and "Test Cases for Canonical XML 2.0" published 5 January 2012
Update of "XML Security Algorithm Cross-Reference" published 5 January 2012
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2012Jan/0011.html
scantor: change looks ok
... however need someone to review XML Encryption 1.1 during Last Call for consistency
... describe which child elements that are permitted for each case in document
<scribe> ACTION: scantor to review XML Encryption 1.1 for schema and text description consistency and clarity [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/17-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-866 - Review XML Encryption 1.1 for schema and text description consistency and clarity [on Scott Cantor - due 2012-01-24].
<scribe> ACTION: fjh to review XML Encryption 1.1 for schema and text description consistency and clarity [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/17-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-867 - Review XML Encryption 1.1 for schema and text description consistency and clarity [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2012-01-24].
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2012Jan/0012.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-xmlsec-pag/2012JanMar/0000.html (Member only)
note that if we do not have IPR coverage for the elliptic curve, the path forward would be to make it informative
hal: for clarity, make it non-normative, optional is not enough
scantor: would probably have to remove from document
hal: could have informative section
fjh: informative appendix could work. We still do not know the outcome of the PAG but we probably should think about this ahead.
Transition call is scheduled for tomorrow, publication date will follow successful transition approval.
Plan to also publish update to RELAX NG Schemas document in conjunction with 2.0 CR publication
Makoto Fixed typos in namespace names in xmlsec-ghc-schema.{rnc, rng},
introduced an algorithm identifier "http://www.w3.org/2009/xmlenc11#rsa-oaep", and introduced the MGF element.
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-xmlsec-commits/2012Jan/0034.html (Makoto, member only)
ACTION-238?
<trackbot> ACTION-238 -- Thomas Roessler to update the proposal associated with ACTION-222 and send to list. -- due 2012-01-31 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/238
ACTION-717?
<trackbot> ACTION-717 -- Pratik Datta to document the Performance improvements with 2.0 -- due 2010-11-09 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/717
ACTION-862?
<trackbot> ACTION-862 -- Hal Lockhart to review FIPS and RSA-OAEP question in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2011Dec/0001.html -- due 2011-12-20 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/862
<scribe> in progress
ACTION-865?
<trackbot> ACTION-865 -- Frederick Hirsch to contact parties re participation in interop for 2.0 -- due 2011-12-20 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/865
fjh: Close pending actions
close ACTION-850
<trackbot> ACTION-850 Review XML Encryption 1.1 security considerations and propose changes in light of today's discussion closed
close ACTION-864
<trackbot> ACTION-864 Implement CR transition closed
fjh: issue review
ISSUE-227?
<trackbot> ISSUE-227 -- CR of XML Encryption 1.1 requires update to namespace refs, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2011Jun/0017.html -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/227
close ISSUE-227
<trackbot> ISSUE-227 CR of XML Encryption 1.1 requires update to namespace refs, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2011Jun/0017.html closed
ISSUE-122?
<trackbot> ISSUE-122 -- Explain peformance improvements and rationale, relationship to earlier work, document, benchmarks -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/122
ISSUE-91?
<trackbot> ISSUE-91 -- ECC can't be REQUIRED -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/91
none. Note that we will cancel calls as appropriate. Focus needs to be on interop and test cases, let's see what we can do on the list.