Some minor edits

Page 1: Copyright year should be 2005

Page 1/2: Comments about <ins> and <del> tags should be stripped

Page 2: Should language describing the "CR" status be present in a "PR"

Page 3: Should TOC include link to Working Draft (08/26/2003)

         Inconsistency in using singular ("Message") versus plurals 
("Messages") i.e   3.2 Request Message vs 3.3 Response Messages

         Sections 4.1 and 4.2 contain the XKISS prefix but XKRSS is not 
used in Sections 6.1 .. 6.4

[23] The XML Schema in the prefix table should specify "xsi" as the prefix.

      "Cannonicalization" is misspelt.

[26] Update the <documentation> element content to reflect PR status.

[36] Section XX description contains some lines that are not terminated
      with a "." This inconsistancy occurs at numerous places in the spec.

[45] "ID" should be "Id"

[57] Font face for "failure" in the Requestor processing of the Pending
      Response Message is incorrect

[63/64] Use of "two phase" is inconsistant. Sometimes it is 2 phase or
     two-phase.

      Last sentence contains words that are not separated by a 
whitespace. This happens at many other places in the spec esecially when 
the font face changes.

[2.8.1.2 Response1]
      Service URI in LocateResult is http://test.xmltrustcenter.org/XKMS
      which does not correlate with the LocateRequest

[100] anyURI needs to be in correct font

[104] "anyURIS" should be "anyURIs"

       In the X509Chain description, "certificatesa" should be
       "certificates"

[125] The "ds:signature/ds:signatureValue" representation format syntax
       should be replaced by a textual description for consistancy


[147] Service URI is http://test.xmltrustcenter.org/XKMS

[173] Font face of "Id" is not correct

[179] "If more than <UseKeyWith> element is specified" should be
        "If more than one <UseKeyWith> element is specified"

[182] Table entry PKIX Type description should be "X.500 Distinguished 
Name".

[186] X.509 should be replaced by X.500


- Vamsi

Jose Kahan wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Please review and suggest changes quickly if you don't agree with its
> content.  If I left out someone (sorry), please send a mail to the list 
> asking to be added. 
> 
> Note that this section risks to be moved to an appendix soon, so don't
> panic :)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -jose
> 
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/2001/XKMS/Drafts/XKMS-PR-PUB/PR-PUB-xkms-part-1.html#Acknowledgments

Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 17:36:58 UTC