Action for Shivaram: send a follow up message to the XKMS WG mailing list so that we can have consensus on the answer to the QA compliancy proposal.
Done. We added a statement to the status of this document section saying that the compliancy section may be enhanced following feedback received during the CR period.
Action for Jose: contact the QA team to get their
feedback on how best to organize these messages so that it is easier for
people to make
new submissions and get their guidance on how to prepare a test suite with them.
Ongoing. Jose sent a message to the QA wg list asking for guidance. The QA chair put it in the agenda for tomorrow's QA WG teleconference.
Action for Jose: upload the messages to the WG's pages.
Not yet done. Jose was waiting for QA feedback, but will prepare the pages in the meantime.
Action for Rich: answer the XML Schema Second Edition PER request for feedback.
Done. The XKMS specs were not concerned by the new changes.
We considered that at this point, the CR spec becomes the "source document" and that all modifications must be done starting from the published spec (to avoid errors porting the changes to other source versions).
Action for Jose: Add Tommy's Appendix C comments and the few comments we received before CR to the CR issues list, so that they don't get lost.
Action for Stephane: Check with Phil how we're going to handle the modifications to the spec and the issue list and if he agrees to continue being the editor.
The WG charter was automatically extended until June 2004, to take into account the integration of the new Patent Policy. We will then ask for an extension to give us time to complete the specification track. However, if there's not enough WG activity up to that time there's a risk that a new charter extension won't be accepted. We need to show that the WG is alive and progressing towards its goals.
Not discussed because of lack of participants.