On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 5:18 PM Tim Hollebeek via Public < public@cabforum.org> wrote:
> Upon approval of the CAB Forum by ballot in accordance with section 5.3 of > the Bylaws, the S/MIME Certificates Working Group (“SMWG”) is created to > perform the activities as specified in the Charter, with the Charter as > described here ( > https://github.com/cabforum/documents/pull/167/commits/2aa376c06b45146249d0cc6b8cc5d42d08ccb177 > ). > Just to be clear: This link doesn't match the link for a valid proposal, so I don't think this is a valid Ballot yet. https://wiki.cabforum.org/github_redline_guide is helpful, but any suggestions for improvements are welcome. The immutable link is https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/6e0b8e61590164eb2d686ddcf266b189f46fc636...2aa376c06b45146249d0cc6b8cc5d42d08ccb177 The pull request is still https://github.com/cabforum/documents/pull/167 Again, our concern is that the statement that "non-publicly trusted S/MIME certificates are out of scope" accomplishes nothing valuable, and causes real harm. That is, either it fails to keep anything out of scope due to its definition, OR limits the discussion to being impossible to introduce any new requirements due to, by definition, anything not in the existing documents is out of scope. Neither of these scenarios are good, and the risk of harm outweighs any benefits. We remain committed to trying to work with you and understand your goals, to find language that better captures those goals without the problematic ambiguity and harm of what's being proposed.
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@cabforum.org https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public