- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:43:00 -0500
- To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
I beleive all the issues raised during Exclusive Canonicalization Last Call have been addressed [1] and will be requesting that it be made Candidate REC. [1] http://www.w3.org/Signature/2002/01/last-call-issues.html I plan on using the following status, and I of course need to put together and interop matrix... The duration of Candidate Recommendation will last approximately two months (April 16); after which it should proceed to Proposed Recommendation. Note, this specification already has significant implementation experience as demonstrated by its Interoperability Report. We expect to meet all requirements of that report within the two month Candidate Recommendation period. Specific areas where we would appreciate further implementation experience are: 1. Speed of canonicalziation relative to Canonical XML; it should be no slower, is it faster? 2. Use in application contexts. Does the specified behaviour meet application requirements for flexibly canonicalizing document subsets if they are moved out of their context? For example, does your application scenario lead to any difficulties in which a subset (e.g., payload) require the use of an ancestor base that is not easily remedied by including xml:base in the apex of the subset? -- 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, 23 January 2002 12:40:02 UTC