- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:11:28 -0400
- 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 specification. 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 __ http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000710 Abstract 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 identical. [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 [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JulSep/0018.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 specification. 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 [27]http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html. [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