Description
At the April 10th, 2012 meeting of the Infrastructure Framework Subcommittee, the members discussed the following topics:
1. TOPIC EMFW-21 (Classified/Unclassified defaults) Are we ready to approve the changes and close this comment? (Answer: No. We still need to update the data dictionary elements for Confidentiality and CombinedConfidentiality to mention the change in type to use a ValueList type and to mention the default values. Also we need to update the diagram to add a superscript “d” to these elements to show they have defaults.)
2. TOPIC EMFW-20 (Comments) and EMFW-19 (Maintaining additional element order) Are we ready to approve that no changes are needed and close these? (Answer: Yes. The resolution for these was to leave the specification unchanged because it would be inappropriate and place too much of a burden on parsers to require maintenance and passing of comments and preservation of ordering beyond what is required by the XML Schema specification)
3. TOPIC EMFW-18 (Added Section 1.3.4 “ValueLists and Defaults”) Are we ready to approve that text as modified and close this issue? (Answer: No. A few more edits are needed, primarily for cleanup. With these changes, Rex reviewed and liked the wording. We'll plan to approve and close this issue next time, once the edited version of the specification is posted.)
4. TOPIC EMFW-17 (Added Section 1.3.5 “Linking Content Objects and Other DE Components”) Are we ready to approve that text as modified and close this issue? (Answer: No. A few more edits are needed, primarily for cleanup. Jeff has an action item to add a few more examples to give users a better concept for appropriate role names for the links, e.g. “isImageOf” or “isVideoOf”. We'll review the implemented changes for EMFW-17 for approval and close the issue as appropriate next time. )
5. TOPIC Prep for next time: Comment EMFW-16 (Move up the Common Types section) is implemented, EMFW-15 (Use Namespace to Distinguish DE 2.0 from DE 1.0) required no change and EMFW-14 (Signing) deserves attention. (Regarding EMFW-14, the location of the “Other” element is the mechanism by which the DE 2.0 supports signing. The current location supports the same use as in DE 1.0 for signing individual content objects, not the entire DE message itself. (See for example DE_2.0_Example_Appendix_B2.xml in the uploaded zip pulled from DE 1.0 and converted to DE 2.0 which contains multiple signed content objects.) We should revisit our earlier discussion, where we suggested that individual content object signing is more appropriately left to the users and that the DE 2.0 should only support signing of the entire DE 2.0 message.)
References:
(1) JIRA DE 2.0 Issues List: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&pid=10084
(2) Jeff's previous uploaded zip for Working Draft 06 containing mods to specification and schema: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency-if/download.php/45604/edxl-de-v2.0-csprd01-fixed.zip
(3) The latest version of the specification uploaded for today's meeting: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency-if/download.php/45663/edxl-de-v2.0-csprd01-fixed-12-04-10.odt
