On 09/22/2013 06:41 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 09/22/2013 05:25 PM, Erik Andersen wrote:
Hi Stephen,
At the current state we are not making any technical changes. It is pure
editorial, like getting the terminology consistent. I am only at this stage
asking question related to editorial issues.
Ah, good to hear. In the past Hoyt and Sharon have made drafts
available informally. If you can do that in the same way, (just
sending a version we can circulate) that'd be useful since I'm
sure some would be happy to check no problems had slipped in by
accident. I'd just ask that you be extra-careful with any ASN.1
modules changes - things that don't affect the on-the-wire
encoding can still impact on people's code as you know.
Changing the name of a component, i.e asn.1 modules
has an impact to code that is generated by asn.1 compilers.
A similar pb has already happened with the non-repudiation bit,
for which x.509 allows 2 names.
Consistent terminology and naming conventions may be nice,
but not at the price of breaking things.
regards
_______________________________________________
wpkops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops
