- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 14:14:36 -0400
- To: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
- Cc: "Donald Eastlake" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com>
The last two open issues for XMLDSIG [1] (aside from discussion and editorial tweaks) included questions about the format of the base64 type and invariances resulting from one person using schema validation, and another not. In the last two weeks we've addressed these by: 1. Receiving feedback [2] from the Schema WG as to the lexical forms of base64 types. I'll also forward the results of our minutes to that WG with respect to our preferences for its schema normalized form [3]. 2. Understanding that schema validation is like any other transform: if transmitter executes it, but the recipient doesn't, the signature may break. This is best addressed by the use of an explicit transform [4] Consequently, I have marked these issues as closed and Don and I will start the process to advance the spec to the next maturity level in the IETF and W3C. [1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/20000228-last-call-issues.html#CandidateREC-2 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2001JulSep/0085.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2001JulSep/0103.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2001JulSep/0074.html -- 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 Wednesday, 1 August 2001 14:14:54 UTC