See also: IRC log
<trackbot-ng> Date: 08 January 2008
<tlr> ScribeNick: brich
<tlr> Scribe: BruceRich
<FrederickHirsch> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2008Jan/0011.html
<tlr> Minutes from 11th Dec approved.
<tlr> http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes-public.html
<tlr> http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-xmlsec-minutes.html
RESOLUTION: Minutes from 18th Dec approved
Frederick Should we go to biweekly meetings or stay with weekly and shorten length?
<tlr> either way works for me
<shivaram> I like the idea of having shorter weekly meetings - it keeps the momemtum
<EdS> +1 to shorter meetings
RESOLUTION: Keep weekly meetings, but shorten as needed
tlr No further input expected from us, told Core we are fine with disposition of comments
Sean incorporated all comments except "unreadable output", updated spec refs
tlr put a hack in place to deal with "unreadable output" issue, will document convention followed, others are free to improve it
<FrederickHirsch> http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/interop/xmldsig/c14n11/report.html
tlr updated the test report, would like comments before our meeting next week
frederick how close are we to being done?
tlr depends on amount and volume of feedback
<FrederickHirsch> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2008Jan/0010.html
frederick proposed a fix to the test document for references to Appendix A
RESOLUTION: Proposed fix to section 3.2.5 is accepted
<Zakim> tlr, you wanted to update about schedule
jcc Having hardware/software issues in completing interop test cases assigned to him
<scribe> ACTION: Sean to implement fix to section 3.2.5 in testcase doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-128 - Implement fix to section 3.2.5 in testcase doc [on Sean Mullan - due 2008-01-15].
frederick is the testcase doc up to date? are more changes needed?
sean the c14n11 section is good
sean the xpointer tests are named incorrectly, inconsistent with testcase doc
<FrederickHirsch> sean - DName tests not implemented, remove from doc
<scribe> ACTION: sean to rename the xpointer tests as per doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-129 - Rename the xpointer tests as per doc [on Sean Mullan - due 2008-01-15].
tlr need to record which tests depend on an optional feature
<tlr> tlr: I think we should record that the test depends on optional feature, we don't think it's critical path for PER implementation report
<FrederickHirsch> tlr: including optional use of xslt
<FrederickHirsch> sean: removing DName tests makes sense, redundant, not implemented
<FrederickHirsch> jcc: agree
RESOLUTION: Remove unused DName cases from the doc
jcc concerned about test case numbers moving around
<FrederickHirsch> leave the file names alone, do not renumber
<tlr> tlr: don't change filenames, just let the software do its thing on section numbers
<FrederickHirsch> jcc: not change name of test cases
<FrederickHirsch> +1
<tlr> ... probably not worth the effort to have consecutively numbered test cases ...
<scribe> ACTION: sean to remove unused DName cases from the doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-130 - Remove unused DName cases from the doc [on Sean Mullan - due 2008-01-15].
<tlr> FYI, the implementation report is member-confidential unless changed
tlr still needs to do final polishing of doc, update acknowledgement section, identify those sections for which testing was a good thing to do, say what the testcases do
<FrederickHirsch> another reason not to change test names is to allow referencing earlier discussion re those test cases
<FrederickHirsch> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2008Jan/0007.html
RESOLUTION: Accept change to namespace document
<FrederickHirsch> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0031.htm
<tlr> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0031.html
<FrederickHirsch> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec-maintwg/2007Dec/0031.html
Frederick If we make changes to signature, may have to open encryption, is this a problem?
<pdatta> This is good
<tlr> I just made the change in the wiki
Frederick ...Put this in the latest update to the charter?
tlr suggest that a note be sent to the workshop participants requesting review/input on charter
Ed sees absence of ECC in the charter as a possible void
<FrederickHirsch> Ed: ECC could be topic for XML Encryption
<FrederickHirsch> tlr: charter already broad, degree of support?
<FrederickHirsch> Rob: MITRE interested in ECC for XML Enc
<shivaram> just a note, ECC must be present as the federal gov suite-B initiative requires it
<tlr> Anyone can look at that draft, and anyone can send comments to public-xmlsec-discuss
frederick, wiki is public so interested (nonW3C) parties can review
<FrederickHirsch> http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/wiki/charter
<FrederickHirsch> ACTION: frederick update xmlsec public web page with pointer to wiki draft charter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-131 - Update xmlsec public web page with pointer to wiki draft charter [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2008-01-15].
<tlr> ACTION: thomas to send message to public-xmlsec-discuss [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-132 - Send message to public-xmlsec-discuss [on Thomas Roessler - due 2008-01-15].
<FrederickHirsch> ACTION: frederick to respond to magnus re DerivedKey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-133 - Respond to magnus re DerivedKey [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2008-01-15].
skipping for now, given Hal's absence
ACTION-74 Open
ACTION-112 Open
<tlr> ACTION-74 reassigned to fjh
ACTION-115 Open pending email from jcc
ACTION-123 Closed
<FrederickHirsch> no issues regarding naming changes or test case updates
ACTION-124 Closed
<FrederickHirsch> see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-xmlsec-commits/0009.html
ACTION-125 Closed
jcc show 2 ways to encode an xml doc, one with schema and one without
jcc when don't have a schema, may be issues with xpath
frederick this is hard to understand without seeing the doc or examples
jcc need another couple of weeks to pursue