security-services message

Subject: No overlap with issues - RE: [security-services] editorial commen tssummary

From: Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@entegrity.com>
To: "'Jeff.Hodges@sun.com'" <Jeff.Hodges@sun.com>,oasis sstc <security-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:43:47 -0500

Title: No overlap with issues - RE: [security-services] editorial comments summary

None of the items Jeff identified as editorial changes were classified as issues.

Two notes on Jeff's list:

>SAP-4. [need to alter spec language to account for "Assertion(s) containing
>FooStatement(s)" rather than simply stating "Foo Assertion(s)"]

This and the next are the tip of very large iceberg. ALL editors need to look at every occurance of "Assertion" and see if it needs to be changed to "Statement."

I don't know what to do about the Domain Model material in the core. Perhaps it would be easiest to just put a comment at the beginning of the section saying that Assertion X really means Assertion containing Statement X.

>SAP-15 (2) [see Hal's response] "subject element of authentication statements"
>rather than "subject element of returned assertions". See SAP-4.

The second half of this item is about multiple authentication statements. I explained why I believe this is not an issue or require any other change, but other people should see if they agree. Perhaps some clarifying text would be a good idea.

Hal