[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Brief Note RE: [emergency] RE: Question on EDXL-DE schema
FWIW, I confirmed that if one substitutes "##other" for "##any" in the schema, it validates. Otherwise, it doesn't. Ciao, Rex At 6:29 AM -0600 1/22/06, Elysa Jones wrote: >Rex and others, > >Yes we did vote on the spec as indicated in the posted draft meeting >notes. The documentation was presented to OASIS for submittal. I >provided the documents just as we reviewed them in that meeting. >There were no corrections that came in after the call. However, >OASIS came back and requested a "red-lined" version of the changes. >As you know, we reviewed a document without red lines but with a >supplemental document that identified each and every change. This >is apparently not the approved submittal format for a 15-day review >so, Patti is working to get the document in that form. > >I am glad this validation issue came up before the actual submittal >and it needs to be worked out before the document is posted. >Depending on the change(s) necessary, we may also have to vote on it >again. As we have agreed in the TC, it is more important to get it >right than get it out there with errors. We will have our regular >full TC meeting on Tuesday 1/24 and will address any remaining >issues. Also, OASIS has schema experts that we can query about this >issue if it is warranted. > >Regards, >Elysa > >At 04:03 PM 1/20/2006, Rex Brooks wrote: >>Hi Folks, >> >>Can someone clarify the status of the spec at this point? I had to >>leave a bit before the end of the last TC meeting, and I thought we >>were pretty much done. That would make this thread moot. Is that >>incorrect? >> >>I tried to trace the thread back to get clarification that way, but >>I got confused. I think that we may have had a case of one or >>another of the comments being based on an incorrect "current" >>version. I would really like to know where we stand at this point. >> >>Regards, >>Rex >> >>At 6:35 PM -0700 1/19/06, Ellis, David wrote: >>>Art, Renato >>> >>>At this point the SSIWG can define prototype location schema for >>>sensor content objects and evaluate them be assigning these >>>elements a "testing" namespace. This will allow continued >>>exploration of needed functionallity. >>> >>>Once experiments have validated best elements structure (e.g.DoD >>>and DNDO experiments), the SSIWG could recommend either addition >>>of needed elements via EDXL-SS using the namespace=##other >>>elements in current EDXL-DE or propose additions of content object >>>elements for future versions of EDXL-DE. >>> >>>David E. Ellis >>>Information Management Architect >>>(505) 844-6697 >>> >>> >>>From: Art Botterell [mailto:acb@incident.com] >>>Sent: Thu 1/19/2006 5:30 PM >>>To: Renato Iannella >>>Cc: Emergency_Mgt_TC TC; Mark Carlson - Conneva, Inc. >>>Subject: Re: [emergency] RE: Question on EDXL-DE schema >>> >>>I had occasion to revisit the notes on digital signatures and >>>encryption in the CAP 1.1 spec... sections 3.3.2.1 and 3.3.2.2 >>>respectively. This was the language contributed by Bob Wyman, and >>>now that I'm getting around to addressing some of those issues, it >>>seems workable, concise and unambiguous. Maybe it would give us >>>some guidance on how to express what we're trying to do here. >>> >>>Meanwhile, I understand that several folks are playing with >>>experimental extensions that they may or may not propose for >>>ratification later. Might it make sense to create two versions of >>>the schema... a strict one to go in the spec, and an >>>"experimentors' edition" (with the "##anys") in an application >>>note or whatever? >>>That way maybe we could encourage experimentation without diluting >>>the spec itself. >>> >>>- Art >>> >>> >>>On Jan 19, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Renato Iannella wrote: >>>> On 20 Jan 2006, at 04:08, Ellis, David wrote: >>>> >>>>> The ##other is an acceptable replacement for the ##any value >>>>>located in the any element following the xsd:choice element. >>>>>The intent of this element in the EDXL-DE schema is to provide >>>>>a mechanism for signing our contentObjects. The signing >>>>>process (refer to >>>>><http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/>http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/) >>>>>uses a different namespace than EDXL-DE. >>>> My point has always been that if this is the *intent* of the >>>>element, then that is what we need to clearly >>>> indicate in the spec. It is used for digital signatures - full >>>>stop. If we start to say that the *same* element can be use for >>>>'experimental extensions' then we will have problems in the >>>>future (guaranteed !) >>>> >>>> The best option to make this explicit is to reference the W3C >>>>XML Digital Signature namespace. >>>> All that is needed is to include the DigSig namespace at the top >>>>of the EDXL Schema: >>>> >>>>xmlns:ds="<http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig>http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig# >>>> >>>> and in the ContentObjectType, put a reference to the DigSig >>>>Signature element: >>>> >>>> <xsd:element ref="ds:Signature" minOccurs="0"/> >>>> >>>> Cheers... Renato Iannella >>>> National ICT Australia (NICTA) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ---- >>>> This email and any attachments may be confidential. They may >>>>contain legally >>>> privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, >>>> use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended >>> > recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then >>>> delete both >>>> messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer >>> > virus, >>>> data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised >>>> amendment. This notice should not be removed. >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >>>> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your >>>>TCs in OASIS >>>> at: >>>><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups..php >>> >>> >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >>>generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS >>>at: >>><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups..php >> >> >>-- >>Rex Brooks >>President, CEO >>Starbourne Communications Design >>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >>Berkeley, CA 94702 >>Tel: 510-849-2309 >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >>generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS >>at: >>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-849-2309
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]