Early Review of draft-young-entity-category-02
review-young-entity-category-02-genart-early-taylor-2015-12-31-00

Request Review of draft-young-entity-category
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Early Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-12-31
Requested 2014-10-08
Draft last updated 2015-12-31
Completed reviews Genart Early review of -02 by Tom Taylor (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Tom Taylor
State Completed
Review review-young-entity-category-02-genart-early-taylor-2015-12-31
Reviewed rev. 02 (document currently at 07)
Review result Almost Ready
Review completed: 2015-12-31

Review
review-young-entity-category-02-genart-early-taylor-2015-12-31

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<

http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-young-entity-category-02
Reviewer: Tom Taylor
Review Date:  8/10/2014
Deadline:    31/10/2014

Summary: Close to ready, with minor issues.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Remarks (1)-(3) also apply with applicable changes to Sections 4.1-4.2.



(1) The way in which multiple categories are associated with a SAML 


entity is not stated explicitly in Section 3.1. Is this done by one 


Attribute per category or by putting multiple AttributeValues into the 


same Attribute? Section 3.2 implies the latter, but the syntax should be 


clarified.




(2) Quoting a paragraph late in Section 3.2:

   If significant changes are made to a category definition, the new
   version of the category SHOULD be represented by a different category
   URI.



This makes me very uneasy from an interoperability point of view. One 


could get unexpected results from conflating two versions of the same 


category. I assume the Working Group's intention was to let the category 


authority decide the issue.




(3) Quoting the next paragraph in Section 3.2:

   Entity category attribute value URIs MUST be treated as opaque
   strings.



The document does not say for what purpose they have to be so treated. 


Obviously not for resolution (mentioned earlier). Please add some text 


on this.




Nits/editorial comments: