Marcin
Thanks, for the careful review. some comment inline
[removed cross post, fails anyway]
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:04 PM, ext Marcin Hanclik wrote:
Hi Marcos, All,
Please find below my - mostly editorial - comments to the latest
digsig draft and one comment for P&C.
Thanks.
Kind regards,
Marcin
1. Section 1: "... with XML signatures that each cryptographically
include all of the non-signature ..."
should become (missing "s")
"... with XML signatures that each cryptographically includes all of
the non-signature ..."
this is already fixed in the latest draft
2. Unify "case sensitive" phrase. There are now both "case-
sensitive" and "case sensitive" present in the text.
ok, lets go with "case-sensitive" since Websters has that.
3. Section 1.2: Maybe the common terms could be unified between
DigSig and P&C? Both specs will probably be always used together.
the goal was to be as clear as possible in widgets signature, and
omitting detail not needed.
"A file entry is the compressed (or Stored) representation of a
physical file or folder contained within a widget package, as
defined in the [Widgets Packaging] specification.
The root of the archive is the top-most path level of the widget
package, which MAY logically contain one or more file entries, as
defined in the [Widgets Packaging] specification.
A file name is the name of a file contained in a widget package
(derived from the file name field of a local file header of a file
entry), as defined in the [Widgets Packaging] specification. All
file names MUST be treated as case-sensitive. In other words, case
matters in file name comparisons. "
Proposed changes:
a) Replace "root of the archive" with "root of the widget"
"root of the widget package", as you corrected in later email
ok
b) Clarify "file name" in P&C (the definition in DigSig says about
deriving from file name field and it seems strange to me).
why? it is the string file name?
c) Replace all the lines above with the following:
"The file entry, root of the widget and file name terms are to be
interpreted as defined in the [Widgets Packaging] specification."
I think I disagree, I think it is helpful to be able to read the
widgets spec without constantly referring to P & C (even though they
are closely related)
4. Section 1.2:
"This specification uses [ABNF] syntax to define file names. Rules
are concatenated by being written next to each other. A rule ended
by * means zero or more. See [ABNF] for details on this syntax."
->
"This specification uses [ABNF] syntax to define file names."
Additional clarifications may only confuse the reader, since [ABNF]
is detailed enough and the actual semantics remains the same.
I see no harm in making it clear
5. Section 4, item 3: "ascending numerical order" -> numerical order
is implied by simple ASCII sorting, so I suggest "ascending
numerical order" becomes simply "ascending order". This would also
match the "descending order" in item 6 where "numerical" is not
present.
numerical order is not implied by ascii sorting, see "02" vs "12" as
opposed to "2" and "12", they sort differently if you treat as strings
or as numbers because of the leading 0.
6. Section 4, item 5: ".. treat this as.." -> what is "this"? I
suggest to change the text to "... treat this widget package as ..."
ok
7. Section 4, item 6: "Validate the signature files in the
signatures list" -> "signatures" looks weird, the cause is <var> vs.
<code> in HTML.
agree.
8. Section 5.3.1: "A file entry whose file name that does not match
the" -> "that" should be removed
yes, thanks
9. Section 5.4: identify the X.509 version fully. "The X.509
certificate format MUST" could become "The X.509v1 certificate
format MUST"
No, it should be v3 but other versions are allowed, as noted. I think
we should leave this alone.
9.a. The following references can be added:
9.a.i. X.509v1: http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.509-198811-S/en
9.a.ii. X.509v3: http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.509-199708-S/en
RFC 5280 covers enough doesn't it, PKIX.
10. Section 7.2: The time SHOULD reflect the time that signature
generation completes. -> The time SHOULD reflect the time when
signature generation completed.
ok
11. Section 7.3: If present then user agents MUST perform Basic ->
If present, the user agents MUST perform Basic
ok
12. Section 9.2.1: The time SHOULD reflect the time that signature
generation completes. -> The time SHOULD reflect the time when
signature generation completed.
ok
BTW: Comment to P&C:
1. RFC 2119 terms are in lower-case in P&C, whereas DigSig uses
upper-case (that is more common).
should be upper case.
Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Europe GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com
-----Original Message-----
From: otsi-arch-sec-ow...@omtp.ieee-isto.org [mailto:otsi-arch-sec-ow...@omtp.ieee-isto.org
] On Behalf Of Marcos Caceres
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:42 PM
To: WebApps WG; otsi-arch-...@omtplists.org
Subject: [BONDI Architecture & Security] [widgets] new digsig draft
Hi All,
A new Working Draft of the Widgets 1.0: Dig Sig is ready to be
published [1]. I've put the date of publication as the 31 of March,
with the hope the W3C will publish it some time next week. If
possible, the editors would be greatly appreciate if someone could
check over it before it gets published. Please send any feedback you
might have by the end of the week.
Kind regards,
Marcos
[1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-digsig/
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
________________________________________
Access Systems Germany GmbH
Essener Strasse 5 | D-46047 Oberhausen
HRB 13548 Amtsgericht Duisburg
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michel Piquemal, Tomonori Watanabe, Yusuke Kanda
www.access-company.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This e-mail and any attachments hereto may contain information that
is privileged or confidential, and is intended for use only by the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. Any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the information by anyone else is
strictly prohibited.
If you have received this document in error, please notify us
promptly by responding to this e-mail. Thank you.