Re: David's comments on the draft Ask Vendors survey

[Steve Hanna <Steve.Hanna@Sun.COM>]

Thanks, David. What a prompt response!
We'll go with that text.

Take care,

Steve

Skyberg, David wrote:
> Looks good to me.
> Thanks.
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Steve Hanna [mailto:Steve.Hanna@Sun.COM]
>>Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 9:01 AM
>>To: PKI TC Ask Vendors SC
>>Cc: David Skyberg
>>Subject: David's comments on the draft Ask Vendors survey
>>
>>Thanks, David, for your comments on the draft
>>Ask Vendors survey. My response is below.
>>More comments are welcome, of course.
>>
>>Note that I have moved this discussion to
>>the pki-askvendors mailing list because
>>we're getting into wordsmithing. David,
>>your posts will probably bounce since you're
>>not a member of the SC. I'll resend them
>>to the list if you cc me.
>>
>>David Skyberg wrote:
>> > My biggest comment is just one of terminology.
>> > The US DoD, which is used in the survey as a
>> > driving force, uses the term Public Key Enablement
>> > (PKE) to capture these aspects of putting PKI into
>> > applications. This seems to be a term that is
>> > catching on in the industry. Doesn't it make
>> > sense to leverage that concept in this survey?
>>
>>This seems like a good idea. I'm not inclined
>>to use PKE throughout the survey because I think
>>it's not as widely understood as "PKI support",
>>but I do think we should mention it in case it
>>rings a bell with some folks. Here's the change
>>I propose:
>>
>>Old text:
>>
>>... This makes it very hard for users to deploy PKI.
>>They must spend large amounts of money customizing
>>applications to work in their PKI installation.
>>
>>New text:
>>
>>... This makes it very hard for users to deploy PKI.
>>They must spend large amounts of money on Public Key
>>Enablement (PKE), adding PKI support to applications
>>and customizing applications to work in their PKI
>>installation.
>>
>>OK?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Steve

S/MIME Cryptographic Signature