[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: SwA profile Issue 364 action for TC members
There is one major open issue for the SwA profile, which is
whether XML attachments require XML canonicalization. This is issue 364
[1]
TC members
(a) argued against requiring canonicalization [2],
[3] and treating XML attachments as opaque. The Committee Draft reflected
the TC viewpoint [4].
(b) Brian submitted a comment at the end of public review
arguing that canonicalization should be considered [5]. Draft 16 incorporated
proposed text to follow this recommendation, requiring canonicalization (see
section 3) [6]
(c) Members of the TC argued against this. Their logic is
reflected in the latest draft, draft 18. [7] These arguments were not recorded
on the mail list, so please make them on the list now.
Brian has provided additional rationale [8] and some of
these members have revised their viewpoint [9]
As
editor I'd like the TC to decide on the correct action before I make any
additional change to the profile. Should I change to require XML
canonicalization? Should I use the text provided in draft 16 on this
topic?
Please send a message to the WSS list indicating support
for requiring XML canonicalization or for leaving draft 18 as it is on
this issue. Better yet, propose specific changes to draft
18.
It would help move this document forward for the TC
to be able to make a decision on the next call, scheduled for 17 May. We also need to consider whether
this change would require additional interop and/or public
review.
Thanks
regards, Frederick [4] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wss/download.php/10902/wss-swa-profile-1.0-cd-01.pdf
and
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]