Hi all, On Jan 15, 2025, at 09:43, Joe Abley <[email protected]> wrote:
> My apologies for the delay; I have been on a protracted vacation and was > deliberately ignoring my work inbox while I was away. > > I will look at this today. The document refers to "trust anchor file" in a bunch of places. It also refers to the "XML document" or simply "document" to refer to the same thing. I think it would be nice to be consistent. Personally, I find the word "file" to be archaic, and I don't like that it presupposes an implementation of (e.g.) something stored on a filesystem. I think "document" is better and in my opinion the document should use "trust anchor document", "XML document", "document" consistently throughout. There are some examples in the most recent diff of "file" being replaced by "document" but there are still instances of "file" e.g. Section heading 4.1.3 "Different Outputs from Processing the Trust Anchor File" Section 2.2 first paragraph "The TrustAnchor element is the container for all of the trust anchors in the file" Section 2.3 first paragraph The following is an examplf of what the trust anchor file might look like" Section 3.2 third paragraph "The content an origin of the XML document [note document replaces file in the diff] can be verified using a digital signature on the file" (so document and file used in the same sentence) Section 3.3, end of paragraph "... such as software vendors comparing the trust anchor files they are using" Section 4, second paragraph "[...] (such as accessing over the Web with or without verifying the signature on the file) [...] users of the trust anchor file need to cosnider [...]" There are a few more (it's trivial to search for "file" to find them). These are pretty minor changes that I think are worth making, but if others object strenuously I will no doubt agree to stop thinking that. :-) Sorry again for not tracking this while I was on vacation. Joe -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
