Re: XLink 1.1: Security Considerations

* Norman Walsh wrote:
>/ Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> was heard to say:
>| No, RFC 1738 is obviously very outdated, I would instead expect that the
>| security considerations of RFC 3987 apply, a clear description on which
>| considerations are out of scope, which are in scope, implications of
>| user agents implementing e.g. XLink and XHTML where the same link might
>| go to multiple destinations, probably that UTR #36 applies, that XLink
>| in XML documents is subject to the security considerations of XML and
>| XML media types where applicable, and so on, depending on what is con-
>| sidered in scope and out of scope. It might of course be possible that
>| some of the items above are considered out of scope, but certainly not
>| all of them.
>
>While the WG recognizes that adding more detailed information about
>security considerations would be valuable, it does not consider such
>additions to be within the narrow scope of its charter for XLink 1.1.
>Consequently, the WG does not expect to make any changes with respect
>to security considerations for XLink 1.1.

I understood the reply to mean that the Working Group feels unable to
work on this due to possible concerns with respect to the Patent Policy
or related policies. Looking at other responses from the Working Group
it rather seems you are saying that because the charter does not require
making such a change, you don't bother. I don't mind if the Working
Group rejects proposals for new features or substantial changes in the
technical direction with a pointer to the charter, but I don't see how
this might be considered an adequate response in this case, in fact, I
don't see where the Working Group might have attempted to satisfy the
reviewer here as required by the W3C Process.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2006 11:15:00 UTC