Re: Some comments on the latest version of the draft

Thanks Gonzalo,

Replies inline.

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Gonzalo Fernández-Victorio
<gonfva@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ryan:
>
> I forward you this email, as it doesn't seem to appear in the list
> archive(I confirmed the permissions) and maybe I should have CC'ed you
> on the first place. I hope it's OK.

Sure. It turns out that the correct mailing list is
public-webcrypto-comments, which doesn't require you to be a formal
member of the W3C WG to provide feedback. Thanks for highlighting the
mailing address distinction, since it will be important as we move
forward with soliciting feedback.

I've copied the list as well, so further replies can be directed to reply-all.

>
> Regards
>
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Gonzalo Fernández-Victorio <gonfva@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:46 AM
> Subject: Some comments on the latest version of the draft
> To: public-webcrypto@w3.org
>
>
> Hi:
>
> I wanted to share some comments on the latest draft. I hope this is
> the proper way.
>
>  On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote:
>> Version 1.44 has been pushed out now, a substantial update from the previous 1.21
>
> 1.-I'm looking at the version of the draft on
>
> http://www.w3.org/2012/webcrypto/WebCryptoAPI/
>
> and as of Sept-3, 11:30 (CET) it appears to be 1.27, not 1.44 (This is
> revision $Id: Overview.html,v 1.27 2012/08/31 19:57:12 rsleevi Exp $.)

Apologies on my announcement. I sent the revision number from the
underlying source file (Overview-WebCryptoAPI.xml), rather than from
the generated file.

v1.27 IS the correct version and does reflect 1.44 of the underlying version.

As we move to FPWD, we'll switch to a date-based versioning scheme
that will hopefully resolve the ambiguities (as well as provide a way
for contributors to compare between revisions in a manner better than
members-only CVS)

>
> 2.-The links
>
> http://dev.w3.org/2012/webcrypto/
> http://www.w3.org/TR/WebCryptoAPI/
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/webcrypto/
>
> at the top of the draft seem to be non active.

Right. Until we move to FPWD, these links aren't quite live yet. At
least, not as I understand it. This will be something that apparently
is resolved during the publication.

>
>> - Resolve ISSUE-13 by adding a use case for JOSE
> 3.-The use case for JOSE appears as new section (section 3) instead of
> a new use case (2.7)

Excellent catch. A mis-indented div. Thanks for the attention to detail.

Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2012 01:46:45 UTC