latest core draft comment

>I believe the latest 29 Dec Draft still had some change bars in the merged version.

Should not be the case, are you looking at revision 3 ?

>Also, throughout the examples and some text, some S: soap prefixes remain, should be changed to S11 for consistency, since that is what the doc and >other parts of examples went to.

Should not be the case, are you looking at revision 3 ?

>Not sure in section 3.1 line 248, why we recommend using keyed encryption, isn't that only applicable to symmetric key? Not major, not sure it needs to >be still in doc, not a showstopper.

This is what was decided.

>Wording in section 5, suggest modification to make MUST NOT clearer, currently have MAY separated from no. Suggest changing line 430 to be 

>"However, only one <wsse:Security> header block MAY omit the S:role attribute. Two <wsse:Security> header blocks MUST NOT have the same value for >s:role."

I can make this editorial chnage.

regards

Frederick

Frederick Hirsch

Nokia

Anthony Nadalin | work 512.436.9568 | cell 512.289.4122