Guys - I was also thinking that "field and extension processing" causes state 
changes that are communicated to the user.  So, rather than introduce an 
additional document to cover this requirement, I prefer to make sure it is 
adequately covered in the proposed existing set of documents.

I'll update the charter for final assent.

All the best.  Tim.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
=JeffH
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 1:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [wpkops] Draft charter last call

I agree with Sean's comments.

regarding PaulH's comments..

 > references are normally not used in IETF WG charters

agreed overall with the point above in that there /are/ a few charters that 
have included such.

 > The references here could easily be removed

I don't think the given references hinder the charter and it's useful to have 
them at least clearly noted.


 > Capturing state changes that are visible to the user doesn't seem to be part 
 >  > of "trust model", "certificate, CRL, and OCSP field and extension  > 
 > processing", "certificate revocation", or "TLS stack operation".
 >
 > Possibly the last document could be expanded to "TLS stack operation and  > 
 > interaction with the browser". Alternately, a document about visible state  
 > > changes in web browsers could be added to the list of documents. A third  
 > > option is to drop the paragraph if the group believes that adding this 
 > would  > be to difficult to do cleanly.

I don't think we should drop it, we discussed this at fair length during the 
BoF..

 > The discussion went to whether or not aspects of UI should be considered  > 
 > in-scope.  It was decided that functional aspects of user interaction should 
 >  > be in-scope.  But aspects of style (such as colours and symbols) should 
 > not.

My supposition is that the "functional aspects of user interaction" will most 
likely be captured in the "TLS stack operation" document.  Altering the 
purported document topic as suggested above is fine by me.


HTH,

=JeffH





_______________________________________________
wpkops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops
_______________________________________________
wpkops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops

Reply via email to