On 06/03/2010, at 10:19 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote: > One comment to the list > (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg01428.html) mentioned > the language used to describe signing objects and certificates. The message > suggested that the very precise language be used at the beginning with a > statement that the common but imprecise language used elsewhere meant the > same thing. > > As wg chair, I received a strong protest to allowing the imprecise language > in the draft and assuring me that this would be raised in IETF last call if > allowed. The protester volunteered to work with the authors to provide > suggestions for precise language in each use in the draft. >
The "strong protest" would be credible were the protester capable of posting an email to the working group mailing list. These reports of unattributed private mail are less helpful in understanding the issue. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
