svn commit: r386873 - head/security/ca_root_nss/files

[Bryan Drewery]

On 5/20/15 10:58 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>
>> On 5/20/15 9:25 PM, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
>>> On 21/05/2015 4:08 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>>> Author: bjk (doc committer)
>>>> Date: Wed May 20 18:08:35 2015
>>>> New Revision: 386873
>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/386873
>>>>
>>>> Log:
>>>>     Fix spelling of "certification authority"
>>>>
>>>>     Approved by:	portmgr (bapt), bapt (ports committer)
>>>>
>>>> Modified:
>>>>     head/security/ca_root_nss/files/pkg-message.in
>>>>
>>>
>>>> -FreeBSD does not, and can not warrant that the certificate authorities
>>>> +FreeBSD does not, and can not warrant that the certification authorities
>>>>    whose certificates are included in this package have in any way been
>>>>    audited for trustworthiness or RFC 3647 compliance.
>>>
>>> FWIW, I intended certificate not certification, so not a spelling mistake.
>>>
>>> Though both are proper, I would asser the former feels more canonical:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority
>>>
>>> Not a biggy, just wanted to mention it.
>>>
>>
>> I agree, Certificate seems more proper. Asking google shows far more hits for
>> Certificate.
>
> This pkg-message is in the context of the Web PKI, and TLS.  TLS is an
> IETF standard; IETF documents are published as RFCs, the official
> repository of which is hosted by the RFC Editor.
>
> The RFC Editor maintains a list of expansions of abbreviations:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt

You mean like the actual TLS 1.2 RFC 5246?

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5246

It has many hits for Certificate Authority and 0 for Certification 
Authority.


>
> In this context, I believe it is quite unambiguous that CA expands to
> "certification authority", and a great deal of traffic on the IETF mailing
> lists supports the lack of ambiguity.
>
> Apparently there is ambiguity in the minds of others (yourselves), though;
> it probably would have been better to have this discussion prior to the
> commit.  I can revert it during the discussion, if you wish.
>
> -Ben
>


-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery