Re: security. Is this implementable?

2008/12/15 David A. Lee <>:
> My read on this is that its slightly better then saying nothing.
> This gives implementations a specific code to use if it cant do something
> for "security" reasons.
> Saying much more would vastly complicate the spec

Perhaps saying just what you've said would be better,

i.e.  " it is implementation dependent, and if
an implementation can't execute a step for security
reasons, use this error code"

I.e. just enough. I think the CR at the moment
says too much!


Dave Pawson
Docbook FAQ.

Received on Monday, 15 December 2008 17:40:46 UTC