Re: Request for Review of WebID specs before publishing

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Erich Bremer <erich@ebremer.com> wrote:

>   https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/tls-respec.html
>  2.2.1.1 Cryptographic Vocabulary
>
> "The following properties *should* be used when conveying the relation
> between the Subject<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/tls-respec.html#dfn-subject>
>  and his or her key, within WebID Profile<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/tls-respec.html#dfn-webid_profile>
>  documents:"
> Shouldn't "SHOULD" be "MUST"?  - Erich
>

Good question!

I've been recently thinking about that section. I think SHOULD is ok for
now, as long as we mention that WebID-TLS supports multiple encryption
algorithms that are available for TLS.

And now...what if tomorrow we find out that a new attack completely breaks
RSA? This is probably a question that we can ask once we move to a WG.

Andrei


>
>
>
> On 09/05/13 9:52 AM, Henry Story wrote:
>
> Dear WebID Community Group,
>
>   we now have three specs up on github here
>
>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/index.html
>
> All editors think that it is time to publish a new version
> on the W3C WebID Incubator space, to finalise the distinction
> between WebID, WebID-TLS, and the cert ontology.
>
> So we would like to be able to publish the specs above
> at the following location, by Friday 20 September 2013
>
>   http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/
>
> We would be very happy to receive feedback from
> the community before doing so. If you can spot
> any errors or improvements please let us know,
> we'll do our best to get them in before publication.
>
>    Thanks,
>
>   Henry Story
>
>
> Social Web Architecthttp://bblfish.net/
>
>
>