ISSUE-167: Should Section 5.3.1 specify normative details for a theoretical technology? from Web Security Context Working Group Issue Tracker on 2008-01-07 (public-wsc-wg@w3.org from January 2008)

From: Web Security Context Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:36:47 +0000 (GMT)
To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20080107143647.D2754C6DB0@barney.w3.org>

ISSUE-167: Should Section 5.3.1 specify normative details for a theoretical technology?

http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/issues/

Raised by: Johnathan Nightingale
On product: 

Review comment: We are supplying normative language for no-interaction certs which, aiui, are still purely conceptual.  That feels like defining new protocols to me, particularly since the definition cites a non-existent reference at the moment.  If this is out there in the world and deployed, then I think our language is fine, but I don't think we want to be in the business of defining x509 extensions.

Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 14:36:54 UTC