Re: XLink 1.1: Security Considerations

/ Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM> was heard to say:
| / Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> was heard to say:
| | No, RFC 1738 is obviously very outdated, I would instead expect that the
| | security considerations of RFC 3987 apply, a clear description on which
| | considerations are out of scope, which are in scope, implications of
| | user agents implementing e.g. XLink and XHTML where the same link might
| | go to multiple destinations, probably that UTR #36 applies, that XLink
| | in XML documents is subject to the security considerations of XML and
| | XML media types where applicable, and so on, depending on what is con-
| | sidered in scope and out of scope. It might of course be possible that
| | some of the items above are considered out of scope, but certainly not
| | all of them.
|
| While the WG recognizes that adding more detailed information about
| security considerations would be valuable, it does not consider such
| additions to be within the narrow scope of its charter for XLink 1.1.
| Consequently, the WG does not expect to make any changes with respect
| to security considerations for XLink 1.1.
|
| Please let us know if you find this explanation satisfactory.

I have no record of your response to this question. If we do not hear
back from you before 6 Jan 2006, we will conclude that you are
satisified by this resolution.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.