[saag] Re: [Ext] draft-paulwh-crypto-components-02: no t normative

On Feb 14, 2025, at 16:31, Salz, Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>     • Is there wording in the current draft that feels like it imposes normative requirements on other protocols. We tried to suggest rather than demand, but if we missed, it would be good to fix.
>  You can never tell what someone is thinking when they read, which is why I prefer things to be explicit when possible.  I think something like the following should be added to the end of Section 1.
>  Note that this document is intended to be informative, to provide input to a working group that will be defining cryptographic registries. This document deliberately does not use {{RFC2119}} language. All recommendations and advice contained in this document is intended to be used as input to the working group while processing their drafts.

The second paragraph of the introduction already says what the document does. We can add a bit to say who the intended audience is, namely WGs.

--Paul Hoffman

_______________________________________________
saag mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]