wrt registries (was: Spec status)

Quoting Vijay Bharadwaj <vijaybh@microsoft.com> on 07/20/2016  
(01:04:57 PM MDT):
>
> o   We should consider moving the attestation formats into a       
> registry (perhaps the same one as for the extensions),

If by "move the attestation formats into a registry" you mean to move  
the *definitions, and specifications of, attestation formats* into a  
registry, that is incorrect.

I think what you mean to propose is..

   We should consider moving the specification of the
   attestation formats into a separate specification,
   and also creating and employing a registry of
   attestation format types.

..yes?

I.e., having a registry of attestation format names, and specifying  
attestation formats in a separate spec, are two orthogonal things.  
Unfortunately, we seem to continually conflate those things (further  
below, I attempt to clarify the relationship between registries and  
specifications).

Also, please note that we have an internet-draft for creating the two  
registries we have been discussing: an attestation types (i.e.,  
formats) registry, and an extension identifiers registry..

draft-hodges-webauthn-registries-00
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webauthn/2016Jun/0097.html

Also, you said "perhaps the same one as for the extensions" -- this is  
incorrect as those would be two separate registries. Although, they  
can be created by a single registry-creating specification.

We should add text to the spec referencing these to-be-created  
registries -- this will hopefully keep us on the same page regarding  
our plans in this regard.

HTH,

=JeffH


PS: regarding the relationship between registries and specifications:

There seems to be a general misunderstanding of the purpose and use of  
registries amoungst us -- if we are not careful to use correct  
terminology we are only going to continue to confuse ourselves --  
please allow me to try to clarify registry characteristics  
(IANA-managed registries in particular) and how they relate to  
specifications:

IANA "protocol assignment" registries..

   http://www.iana.org/protocols

..themselves contain only "name, number, code, value" assignments, the  
registries themselves _do not_ contain the definitions or  
specifications of the meaning of each name, number, code, or value.

Rather, a registry contains a list of of the possible "name, number,  
code, value"s of a particular protocol variable, and _point to the  
specification(s)_ where they are defined. And that is all.

Take the "JSON Web Key Parameters" registry as an example..

* the IANA-registered set of "JSON Web Key Parameters" are here..

https://www.iana.org/assignments/jose/jose.xhtml#web-key-parameters

* note that the registry contains only the name, and other salient  
attributes, of each key parameter, and a reference to the  
specification where the key parameter is actually defined.

* note that at this time, JSON web key parameters are defined in two  
separate  specifications: RFC7517 and RFC7518.  Additionally, RFC7517  
defined, and caused the creation of, this IANA registry, and RFC7518  
simply defines an additional set of key parameters, and registers them  
in this registry.

Received on Thursday, 28 July 2016 09:43:58 UTC