Subject: Re: [jose] #111: Section 4.1.8 "typ" (Type) Header Parameter

From: "jose issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 02:05:16 -0000

#111: Section 4.1.8 "typ" (Type) Header Parameter

Description changed by [email-masked]:

Old description:

> A. MAY is very bad word to be used here - how else MAY it be used?  Need
> to look at all of the 2119 language in this section and either correct it
> or get rid of it.
>
> B. The first sentence is not very readable.
>
> C. If it has no effect on JWS processing, then what does it affect - this
> needs to be clarified.
>
> D. If the serialization is changed, does it make a difference between
> JOSE and JOSE+JSON?  Is there any reason to have the second one as you
> cannot now in advance that it is json or compact.
>
> E. Is there a chance that the same value may mean different things
> depending on if it is in the typ or ctyp member?  If so then this is
> going to be very hard to figure out for most people.
>
> F. Are MIME media type values collision resistant?  Does this need to be
> something that is discussed for the experts in reviewing entries here?
> What happens if somebody defines a new media type that conflicts with a
> value in the type registry?
>
> G. If it has no effect on JWS processing, then it should have no 2119
> language
>
> H. It says that type typ value SHOULD be ignored - under what
> circumstances should it not be ignored.

New description:

 A. MAY is very bad word to be used here - how else MAY it be used?  Need
 to look at all of the 2119 language in this section and either correct it
 or get rid of it.

 * FIXED

 B. The first sentence is not very readable.

 * FIXED?

 C. If it has no effect on JWS processing, then what does it affect - this
 needs to be clarified.

 D. If the serialization is changed, does it make a difference between JOSE
 and JOSE+JSON?  Is there any reason to have the second one as you cannot
 now in advance that it is json or compact.

 E. Is there a chance that the same value may mean different things
 depending on if it is in the typ or ctyp member?  If so then this is going
 to be very hard to figure out for most people.

 F. Are MIME media type values collision resistant?  Does this need to be
 something that is discussed for the experts in reviewing entries here?
 What happens if somebody defines a new media type that conflicts with a
 value in the type registry?

 * FIXED - this is all MIME media types now.

 G. If it has no effect on JWS processing, then it should have no 2119
 language

 H. It says that type typ value SHOULD be ignored - under what
 circumstances should it not be ignored.

 * FIXED

--

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-jose-json-web-
  [email-masked] |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major        |   Milestone:
Component:  json-web-    |     Version:
  signature              |  Resolution:
 Severity:  -            |
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/111#comment:1>
jose <http://tools.ietf.org/jose/>