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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

pkcs11 message

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

Subject: for our PKCS 11 TC call today: editorial issues with the PKCS #11 v2.40 Committee Specifications

Hi –


Following the email i sent around with the draft motion etc for today’s PKCS 11 TC call, the OASIS folks have raised concerns about several editorial problems with the Base spec, Current Mechanisms, Historical Mechanisms spec and Usage Guide:


Historical Mechanisms

- contains 14 references to "PKCS #11-Base table 15", all of which should refer to Table 10.


Current Mechanisms

  • There are still two references (in "Current") to "PKCS #11 -Base Table 15" which should point to Table 10. (in tables 130 and 134)
  • There are several places (in "Current") where lots of extra blank lines are inserted to avoid breaking tables across a page. This is a poor practice, since it needs to be adjusted if other text is added or removed. This can be accomplished more cleanly by setting the table properties to avoid breaking it. This will also avoid large blank spaces in HTML, such as at 2.45.3.

Base Spec


·         an occurrence of "Error! Reference source not found." in the Base Spec section 4.1


Usage Guide

·         "Error! Reference source not found." - in 2.6.8.


Chet and Paul have strongly suggested that we fix these editorial issues before going to the vote on Candidate Standards.  These would be non-material changes and therefore would not require a public review. But they would require another version of each of these documents, which would then have to be voted on by Special Majority Ballot for promotion to Committee Spec/Note. (see section 3.3 of the TC Process at https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process)


I am happy to make these corrections next week and post updated, corrected versions prior to next PKCS 11 TC call (my apologies for not having caught these in my reviews of the earlier versions of the documents). But I’d like to discuss this in our call today, in case the TC feels we should go ahead and initiate the request for Candidate Standard vote by OASIS membership with the current versions.


Again my apologies for missing these problems!





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