[jose] Stephen Farrell's Yes on draft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options-08: (with COMMENT)

["Stephen Farrell" <[e-mail]>]

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options-08: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Thanks for the discussion of "crit" which I think has resolved
so I'm clearing now.

I didn't check the comments below. No need to respond about
them unless you really want to.


- abstract: the description of the update to 7519 is odd. It
seems to be saying "Here we define a thing. This specification
updates 7519 to say you must not use this thing." but prohibiting
is an odd verb to use there. (Since it wasn't previously there to
be allowed or not.)

- section 6: "It is intended that application profiles specify up
front whether" "intended" is very wishy washy and "up front"
makes no sense at all.