W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1997

Re: A linguistic note on unverifiable transactions

From: David W. Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 12:51:31 -0700 (PDT)
To: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <Pine.SOL.3.95.970425124713.24462A-100000@shell1.aimnet.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3151

On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Koen Holtman wrote:

> David W. Morris:
> [...]
> >
> >Actually 'unverifiable transaction' is bad spec termnology as it implies
> >there might be a verifiable transaction.
> ??
> Verifiable transactions do exist, and are defined by the spec.

That I understand ... I guess my point wasn't clear. The whole notion of
verifiable here is rather obscure as the english word means something to
me much stronger than the usage in the spec.  The implication is along the
lines of a certificate authority having done research to verify the
identity of the origin and providing a CA to that end.  When I initially
studied the various drafts, I found it confusing because I had to keep
reminding myself exactly how the termnology was defined in the draft.

As you pointed out, the concept is completely unsuitable from a UI

Received on Friday, 25 April 1997 12:57:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:19 UTC