W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

Prepping Next Version of Signature Spec

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 18:32:27 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com>
I'm working to publish a new Candidate REC next week, and then if we haven't 
introduced too many more bugs, we can advance the document in May. We may or 
may not be able to resolve the xmldsig#md5 and XSLT!=string issue by next 
week, but I don't think they are critical path for an update to the spec 
(they are straightforward choices regardless.)

Some things to note is that will be using the latest version of schema [2] 
(hopefully I haven't introduced any bugs into the definitions and the one 
example), and we now have a section on CryptoBinary [3] for which the bignum 
text applies to (generalized to all CryptoBinary).

John, there's still some text in there that reads:

>Note: The function definition for here() is intended to be consistent with 
>its definition in XPointer. However, some minor differences are presently 
>being discussed between the Working Groups.

Can this be deleted now?

[1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/20000228-last-call-issues#CandidateREC
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-1-20010316/

Joseph Reagle Jr.                 http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/Signature
W3C XML Encryption Chair          http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2001 18:32:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:10:04 UTC