W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 2000

Canonical XML Last Call

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:11:28 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
The following was sent to W3C Chairs and XML Plenary.

Forwarded Text ----
 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:10:32 -0400
 To: W3C Chairs and XML Plenary
 From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
 Subject: Canonical XML Last Call
 Cc: "Donald Eastlake" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
 The Canonical XML specification is entering its second last call. Last Call
ends July 28th. (The XML Signature WG has a FTF meeting the next week).
While there was a last call by the XML Syntax WG at the beginning of the
year, this last call is needed for the following reasons:
 1. This version is produced by the XML Signature WG.
 2. This version has been adapted to use the approach of using the XPath
data model to serialize XML data.
 3. Consequently,  much of the XPath serialization text that was present in
the Signature specification has been moved to the Canonical XML
 I believe that we've addressed most of the issues raised by the I18N WG
material to XML serialization that were raised during the Signature
specification Last Call. I hope this last call will serve a useful check
point to further (1) tease apart the Signature and C14N specifications
issues, and (2) (redundantly) ensure that those issues which may have
transferred to the C14N specification are addressed.
 Those WG's invited to review this specification include:
 1. XML Query
 2. XML Core
 3. I18N
    This specification describes a method for generating a physical
    representation, the canonical form, of an input XML document, that
    does not vary under syntactic variations of the input that are defined
    to be logically equivalent by the XML 1.0 Recommendation [16][XML]. If
    an XML document is changed by an application, but its Canonical-XML
    form has not changed, then the changed document and the original
    document are considered equivalent for the purposes of many
    applications. This document does not establish a method such that two
    XML documents are equivalent if and only if their canonical forms are
      [16] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#XML
 Status of this document
    This is the second Last Call of the Canonical XML specification and
    the third draft of an alternative approach to the first [17](20000119)
    Last Call. The Last Call ends on July 28, 2000. (See [18]proposal and
    resolved thread to go to last call.) This specification differs from
    the first Last Call in that it (1) uses the XPath [19][XPath] data
    model, and (2) includes a few substantive changes that affect the
    canonical serialization of an XML document. It is not necessary for
    implementations to use XPath to generate the canonical form of an XML
    document. XPath simply provides a data model that is simplified
    compared to InfoSet, yet sufficient for the purpose of
    canonicalization. XPath also provides an expression syntax for
    describing the desired portion of a whole document. Any variances
    between that result from this specification's use of the XPath
    [20][XPath] data model and the XML Information Set [[21]InfoSet] will
    be reported to the XML Information Set's comments list.
      [17] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000119.html
      [19] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#XPath
      [20] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#XPath
      [21] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710#Infoset
    Prior versions of this document were published by the [22]XML Core
    Working Group (the last of which was the [23]20000119 Last Call),
    which delegated the completion of this specification to the IETF/W3C
    [24]XML Signature Working Group.
      [22] http://www.w3.org/XML/Activity#core-wg
      [23] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000119.html
      [24] http://www.w3.org/Signature/
    The XML Signature and XML WGs and other interested parties are invited
    to comment on this proposed direction, review the specification and
    report implementation experience. While we welcome implementation
    experience reports, the XML Signature Working Group will not allow
    early implementation to constrain its ability to make changes to this
    Please send comments to the editors and cc: the list
    <[25]w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>. Publication as a Working Draft does not
    imply endorsement by the W3C membership or IESG. It is inappropriate
    to cite W3C Drafts as other than "work in progress." A list of current
    W3C working drafts can be found at [26]http://www.w3.org/TR/. Current
    IETF drafts can be found at
      [25] mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
      [26] http://www.w3.org/TR/
      [27] http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
    There have been no declarations regarding patents related to this
    specification within the Signature WG.
End Forwarded Text ----

Joseph Reagle Jr.   
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Monday, 10 July 2000 13:11:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:10:01 UTC