Re: [security-services] Errata comments

Scott,

You are right, I did not mean to change the sense of the definition in 
profiles, only  to weaken it to include
consideration of an attesting entity distinct from the subject.

So re-written:

[quote]

"The holder of a specified key is considered to be an acceptable attesting
entity for the assertion by the asserting party."


[\quote]

>PE39:
>
>I think the wording here is off. Leaving aside recent discussions about this
>stuff in parallel, Prateek proposes:
>
>"The holder of a specified key is considered to be an acceptable attesting
>entity for the assertion by the relying party."
>
>I think it's the asserting party that considers this, not the relying party.
>Not sure if that's an accidental mistake or intentional change.
>  
>