- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:25:18 -0400
- To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Signature/Minutes/000907-tele.html 2000-September-7 Chairs: Donald Eastlake and Joseph Reagle Note Taker: Joseph Reagle Participants * Donald Eastlake, Motorola * Joseph Reagle, W3C * John M. Boyer, PureEdge * *Merlin Hughes, Baltimore * Ed Simon , Entrust Technologies Inc. * Mark Bartel, JetForm Status of documents < 5 minutes * Next draft of Canonicalization ([5]WD-xml-c14n-20000907) is being published today, includes a link to its [6]Last Call Issues [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-c14n-20000613 [6] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/09/06-c14n-last-call-issues.html Canonicalization < 15 minutes * Boyer: would like implementors to confirm if his examples operate in the new spec the way implemenations do. * Namespaces: Kent asked about rational for namespace reduction, Boyer responded on list and in [7]Last Call Issues. * Whitespace: addressed in [8]Last Call Issues. Presently, this can invite a ton of trouble that people aren't keen to get into right now. * DOMHASH: some discussion, not a lot of interest presently. DOMHASH should work with present canonicalizations. [7] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/09/06-c14n-last-call-issues.html [8] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2000/09/06-c14n-last-call-issues.html Content Model * Moved Transforms content model to ElementOnly. RSA and OIDS * Merlin posted a [9]summary of options. * Bartel prefer 2. * ACTION: Reagle, email poll of which option people want. * ACTION: Reagle, get Brian/Barb to tweak text once resolved.. [9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JulSep/0398.html RetrievalMethod Type * No one opposed to making Type optional subsequent to [10]Reagle's argument: since its not associated with mandatory behaviour, why make it mandatory when it can also constrain people in ways that don't benefit anyone. [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JulSep/0434.html Other * Eastlake wants to tweak KeyInfo example of 4.4.4. ACTION Eastlake: send to Reagle this afternoon. * Boyer: Include in STATUS: Implementors should take special note of the here() function, it's not the same as the XPointer for which a few questions have been raised and the XLink WG is looking at but haven't responded to yet. * Simon: We're trying to organize an XML Encryption meeting, looking at the end of October (week of October 30th). * Boyer (and others): later in week would be better for those adults who have children (and those adults who still enjoy Halloween themselves :) .) _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 14:25:19 UTC