[Smcwg-public] Requested changes to draft SBRs

[Ben Wilson]

Here are my requested changes based on my recent review of the SBRs.

https://github.com/cabforum/smime/pull/163/files.

Most are punctuation, but I should note here that:

1.  In section 2.3 (line 440), there appeared to be a sentence that was
repetitive: "The CA SHALL indicate conformance with this requirement by
incrementing the version number and adding a dated changelog entry, even if
no other changes are made to the document."
2.  In section 4.2.1 (line 841), the reference should be to section 3.2.2.4
of the BRs, not section 3.2.2.1.
3.  In section 8.6 (line 2426), I think there should be a reference to the
CCADB's instructions on formatting audit letters-
https://www.ccadb.org/policy#51-audit-statement-content
4.  In section 9.9 (line 2607), I think the language should be "the CA
understands and acknowledges that the Application Software Suppliers who
have agreed to distribute the Root CA Certificate ..."  instead of "the CA
understands and acknowledges that the Application Software Suppliers who
have a Root CA Certificate distribution agreement in place with the Root CA
....". (Mozilla agrees to distribute Root CA Certificates, but we don't
have "Root CA Certificate distribution agreements 'in place'".)

Thanks,

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/smcwg-public/attachments/20220817/82439f3c/attachment.html>