Opened 9 years ago

#121 new defect

Section 7.2. JWS JSON Serailziation

Reported by: ietf@… Owned by: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature@…
Priority: major Milestone:
Component: json-web-signature Version:
Severity: - Keywords:


  1. As written this section is no understandable. It needs a big re-write
  1. Don't care about the comparison statement - If anything it should be reversed and placed in the location where restrictions are placed and not in the general case solution
  1. First bullet point can be killed - it is not telling me what to do
  1. Second bullet point - This would be much more readable if you did it either as an outdented list or as a table that is of the form - member name, member description. Could also use the same format that you used for header members as well
  1. The syntax example should occur before the list of fields so that people see the overview and can then go to the specifics.
  1. Define the signatures array and then define the elements that go into that array element.
  1. "Unlike the JWS Compact Serialization, in the JWS JSON Serialization" delete all of the - this should just document this serialization and not worry about comparisons
  1. Last bullet item goes in the data model description and not the serialization description.
  1. the MUST be present in the first sentence belongs in the description of the element and not here
  1. There is a difference of opinion if the signature element MUST be present - the bullet point "if non-empty" vs the list of required after the example.
  1. It is not clear that the statement that one of protected and header must be present - this is implied since alg must be present.
  1. There is no need to state that something is the same as is defined elsewhere
  1. The union should be described in the data model and not here
  1. What is the purpose of the next to last paragraph here. I cannot follow what this text is trying to say.

Change History (0)

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.