RE: Editorial: Wording clarifications in Core Section 4

Thank me for the comment.  The WG agreed to accept these clarifications.
I have two weeks to send myself an acceptance.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-
> addressing-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 10:59 AM
> To: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Editorial: Wording clarifications in Core Section 4
> 
> 
> 4. Security Considerations
> 
>   "Users of WS-Addressing and EPRs (i.e., entities creating, consuming
>   or receiving Message Addressing Properties and EPRs) SHOULD only use
>   EPRs from sources they trust. For example, such users might only use
>   EPRs that are signed by parties the user of the EPR trusts, or have
>   some out-of-band means of establishing trust."
> 
> It's not quite clear what the "or have" refers to - the users? The
> trusted parties?  Suggest rewording the last sentence as:
> 
>   "For example, such users might rely on the presence of a verifiable
>   signature by a trusted party over the EPR, or an out-of-band means
>   of establishing trust, to determine whether they should use a
>   particular EPR."
> 
> In the next paragraph:
>   "integrity protected" -> "integrity-protected"
> 
> And
>   "Such optional integrity protection might be provided by transport,
>   message level signature, and use of an XML digital signature within
>   EPRs."
> 
> Seems like this "and" should be "or".  For clarity, how about this
> rewording:
> 
>   "Such optional integrity protection might be provided by a transport
>   or message-level signature, or the use of an XML digital signature
>   within an EPR."
>

Received on Monday, 9 May 2005 20:50:37 UTC