[abfab] Review of draft-ietf-abfab-usability-ui-considerations-04

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Mon, 01 August 2016 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: abfab@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: abfab@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB13512DA04; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:43:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.188
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.188 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3PwUOT60a14r; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B43E612D5A5; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hebrews (24.21.96.37) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:49:38 -0700
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: <draft-ietf-abfab-usability-ui-considerations@ietf.org>, <abfab@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:43:24 -0700
Message-ID: <021301d1ec2c$f9457550$ebd05ff0$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdHsIN9ouKthyCcFSm6HH82y+WNacw==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Originating-IP: [24.21.96.37]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/abfab/2y7MRoPD2YsuJHsAhKYtM0QNxm8>
Subject: [abfab] Review of draft-ietf-abfab-usability-ui-considerations-04
X-BeenThere: abfab@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application Bridging, Federated Authentication Beyond \(the web\)" <abfab.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/abfab>, <mailto:abfab-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/abfab/>
List-Post: <mailto:abfab@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:abfab-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab>, <mailto:abfab-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 19:43:35 -0000

Here is my review of the document.  Overall I believe that the document is
ready to precede to WGLC.  A few small suggestions below.

1.  Need to expand HCI and UX in paragraph 2 of section 1.

2. ABFAB needs to be expanded on first use in the Abstract and in Section 1.

3.  RFC4282 has been obsoleted and should be updated.

4.  Suggest s/identities per organization/identities within an organization/

5.  In section 5.1 s/NAI superficially looks like/NAI looks like/  no
superficially about how it looks.

6. In section 6.1:  It might be reasonable to give the circumstances in
which the "Identity provider realm" is going to be different from the NAI
real

7. In section 6.5.2:  Should we potentially call out EAP as being one way of
doing automated modification?

8.  In section 7.6: Should highlight that enumeration is not a good idea.
Yes, it is a problem for headless.


I don't really expect that you are going to address either of these.  It
just seems to be "not so good" writing to my American ear.

Hobby Horse issue:  Get rid of the word 'will' in most of the document.  For
example, rather than "then something more complex will be needed." Can
become "then something more complex is needed".

Hobby Horse issue: Same thing with "could be".

Jim