- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:54:49 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
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? 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 10:55:36 UTC