RE: ISSUE-52 (scantor): Rules for syntax of KeyInfo child elements should be unambiguous [Errata-XML Signature] from Scott Cantor on 2008-09-16 (public-xmlsec@w3.org from September 2008)

From: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:52:59 -0400
To: "'Frederick Hirsch'" <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: "'XML Security Working Group WG'" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00c001c91803$879cab90$96d602b0$@2@osu.edu>

> Are we able to do anything here?

I don't know that it matters, I was just confused by the reference to 5280
in the message.

> sounds like some additional clarification text might be useful,
> perhaps a proposed errata?

I would be happy to tweak the text if we're doing a "new" version. I don't
know if it's worth an errata or not, maybe. I only noticed it because when I
was creating the issue, I wanted to make sure that if there were any other
ambiguous KeyInfo children that I mentioned them, so I did a quick scan of
the document and that one didn't read clearly to me.

-- Scott

Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2008 13:53:51 UTC