Re: [pkcs11-comment] Re: PKCS#11 2.40 Errata Public Comment Resolution

[Valerie Fenwick <valerie.fenwick@oracle.com>]

On 5/2/2016 12:34 PM, Jaroslav Imrich wrote:
> On 28 April 2016 at 23:25, Valerie Fenwick <valerie.fenwick@oracle.com
> <mailto:valerie.fenwick@oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thank you, Jaroslav, for taking the time to give us a detailed feedback on
>     PKCS11 2.40 errata document.  We all really appreciate your fine eye for
>     detail, and have taken into consideration all of your comments. The current
>     plan is to not do an update of the errata, but rather make adjustments in
>     our next version of the specification where it makes sense with our current
>     direction.
>
>
> I find it rather disappointing that all comments were resolved with "No change"
> decision instead of a simple explanation in errata docs. Let's hope TC will
> adapt more open and user friendly approach for the next versions of specification.

We are hoping to do things much more openly, especially with respect to header 
files. Watch the space for details. As it has been asks so often on this alias, 
if I have any news I will be sure to share it on the comments alias.

> BTW now that all comments are resolved what is the next step for v2.40 Errata
> 01? Will it move from "csprd01" version to the final "os" version? Or should
> "csprd01" be considered the final version?


We currently have a ballot open to moving forward to approved errata

Thanks again, for all of your feedback.

Valerie

--
Note: I am using voice recognition software. Forgive any strange words.
Valerie Fenwick, http://bubbva.blogspot.com/ @bubbva
Solaris Cryptographic & Key Management Technologies, Manager
Oracle Corporation: 4180 Network Circle, Santa Clara, CA, 95054.