The next milestone should be WG last call on
base in May, so if your suggestion is likely to cause that
date to slip, I guess it'd be good to include a justification
for that.
Good point, of course. Dave and I babbled briefly at each other about
this recently, and I think a split makes sense -- the benefit is keeping
the independent elements isolated, allowing
1. components that can be referenced separately (and can reference each
other, and
2. components that can be added or replaced as necessary; this is
particularly useful for things like "how do I canonicalize the message",
"how to I get the signing key", and "how do I encrypt/decrypt" (that
last is already split out, by reference to RSA and SHA-x).
I think the work of splitting it will be small, and won't affect the
schedule, but I'll let Eric, et al, make that ultimate judgement. My
inclination is to give the document editor a veto option on it, to avoid
schedule problems. On the other hand, I think getting the document
structure right is important.
Barry
--
Barry Leiba, Pervasive Computing Technology
(leiba(_at_)watson(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com)
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba
http://www.research.ibm.com/spam
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html