OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

humanmarkup message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: [humanmarkup] RFC:HM.requirements:Security

Hi Everyone,

I thought it would be handy for you all to have an example of how 
best to register your comments on requirements as they occur to you. 
By using a Subject Line as shown in this message: 
RFC:HM.rquirements:WhateverArea you will facilitate the process of 
gathering together our comments in one set of threads so that we can 
amalgamate them for review in a few months.

Very few months. Time Flys.

So, now on to my comments.

We need to be compatible with several standards that are developing 
in parallel with our standards. I will compile a list of such efforts 
soon. We will not know, or have a good measure of what criteria we 
need to employ -- if we need to employ anything other than 
compatibility -- until the weather clears over this area, so making 
broad statements now serves little purpose now.

However, I can say that I strongly suspect that we may need or want 
to drive requirements onto other specs to more adequately protect 
privacy in our bailiwick. That remains to be seen, but I am not 
hearing much except, "Uh, Punt," from other groups. The issues of 
rights and negotiations get right in the way of developing many of 
the specifications that need to get written now, so deferring this 
issue and hoping that the specific standards efforts that have taken 
on the issues will take care of it seems to be the norm.

The problem is that most of the Security efforts currently underway 
are being performed by special interests, rather than general 
interests, so as generalists in service of individual rights in a 
more focused way than any others I have yet perused, we may need to 
say something about it.

I am hearing respect for privacy from all standards, but I am just 
not seeing it encapsulated in requirements or specifications, yet. 
Granted, I have not looked closely at all such efforts. One way or 
another, even if we find that we don't actually have to weigh in 
ourselves, we do have to satisfy ourselves that our concerns are 
handled properly.

Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com
Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC