Re: NEW issue - cross document

On Jul 10, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:

> Most of the security conserns mentioned in PROV-N also apply to
> PROV-O, so I'm all for of gathering them in one place.
> 
> However security conserns are by their nature going to be incomplete
> (it is similar to trying to enumerate all known bugs), and we might
> want to expand on it later. Should it be a separate Note that we refer
> to instead?

+1 "known bugs" seems to be a document more in line with "best practices" - we know more on an ongoing basis.

-Tim

> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>> I'm in a bit of a rush, but I wanted to raise a new issue concerning
>> security concerns before going to last call - I think we should describe
>> them in one place (PROV-DM?) and refer to them from other documents.
>> Currently they're buried in PROV-N, and some in PROV-AQ.
>> 
>> The rationale is that we want security considerations to be prominent and
>> get maximum review.
>> 
>> See also my comments on PROV-N document.
>> 
>> Gotta go now, I'll try and hook this into tracker later.
>> 
>> #g
>> --
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
> School of Computer Science
> The University of Manchester
> 
> 

Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2012 12:37:27 UTC