W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-comments@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: [Jena-devel] (formal) comment on security considerations

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:51:32 +0000
Message-ID: <45E30204.802@hpl.hp.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org

I have lost track of whether I have formally accepted the WG response to 
my comment. If not, let this be it. I am happy that the WG is responding 
to my comment appropriately; whether normative or informative and 
details of labels etc. I am happy to leave to your discretion and expertise.


Dan Connolly wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 15:55 -0500, Harry Halpin wrote:
>> Jeremy,
>>     The final decision in DanC's hands, but we already decided as a WG
>> not to use conformance labels.
> Er... my suggestion is to put it back in the WG's hands, but I suppose
> it's good to know if Jeremy is OK with not adding a conformance
> label...
>>  However, we do want implementers to be
>> aware of security issues. So, if that text was added to section 7 as
>> informative text and we substituted the words "GRDDL-aware agent" for
>> "GRDDL-aware processor", would you feel like your comment has been
>> addressed?
Received on Monday, 26 February 2007 15:52:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:55:02 UTC