- 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