- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:42:36 -0500
- To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Signature/Minutes/991209-tele.html
[1]IETF [2]W3C [3]XML Signature WG
[1] http://www.ietf.org/
[2] http://www.w3.org/
[3] http://www.w3.org/Signature/Overview.html
99-December-09
Chairs: Donald Eastlake and Joseph Reagle
Note Taker: Joseph Reagle [[4]ascii]
[4] http://www.w3.org/Signature/Minutes/991209-tele,text
Participants
* Donald Eastlake 3rd, IBM
* Joseph Reagle, W3C
* Mark Bartel, JetForm
* Ed Simon , Entrust Technologies Inc.
* John Boyer, UWI
* Peter Lipp,
* Todd Vincent, GSU
* David Solo, Citigroup
* Richard Himes, US District Court of New Mexico
Review of Outstanding Action Items
* ...
Status of documents < 5 minutes
Requirements: pending IESG advancement to Informational RFC.
Post a Core version this week to WG page, then hopefully another one
that addresses any SignedInfo syntactical changes as a pseudo
proposal.
Signature Syntax & Processing draft questions:
* Transforms and Node Sets
+ conversation resulting from Kent and Boyer on "the output of
the this transform is a new XML document" -> the output of
the XPath transform is a node set, string, boolean, or
number. Boyer will send text to replace present text.
+ if you want text, then you must call the function 'string()'
+ XMLSig needs to define an order of attributes (and
namespaces). Boyer will send text on how xmlns are ordered.
* John is asking for a [5]validate attribute.
+ Solo: need a very mechanistic and non-variant way to do deal
with the signature over actual content referenced in the
core: sign one or more things, if it comes back as valid,
they all come back. References in the core signature that
allow objects to change and come back as valid is an absurd
premise. The core references' content can't change.
+ [Reagle gets caught in conversation and doesn't take good
notes.]
+ No concensus to introduce validate attribute.
* [6]Eastlake's Syntax Proposal
+ Call discusses Don's proposal though most haven't had a
chance to look at it closely. Generally people are
comfortable with grouping ObjectReferences in a Manifest
other things (like Object and SignedProperties) need more
discussion.
+ Reagle: Discuss proposal on list. After a weeks conversation,
Don should try to represent his proposal as a variant spec.
By 12/21 have a sense of what changes if any WG is
comfortable with. Once we've made those decisions public a
draft. In January begin producing functionality FAQ (How do I
sign the KeyInfo, how do I create a location indepedent
signature) using stable syntax as a way to mediate WG last
call. And use stable syntax to write examples for rough
interop testing.
[5]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/1999OctDec/0438.html
[6]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/1999OctDec/0444.html
Face to Face meeting arrangements < 10 minutes
* Meeting is in SanJose on the 21st, further logistics should
follow.
_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.
Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 9 December 1999 17:42:38 UTC