Thanks for the suggestion -- you're right that it was ambiguous in that
way. Here's a slight tweak to your tweak:
"This offer of a listing does not imply endorsement of any SAML-based
specification, and the SSTC reserves the right not to list any received
submission."
I feel like I should add "Not valid in Tennessee or wherever such
contests are prohibited" or something. :-)
Eve
Linn, John wrote:
> Proposed tweak to one sentence:
>
> ...
>
> The SSTC reserves the right not to list any SAML-based specification,
> and no endorsement by the SSTC of any such specification is implied.
> The SSTC [link: IPR declaration page] does not apply to such
> specifications. This listing is a courtesy only.
>
> ...
>
> Suggest replacement for first sentence: "The SSTC does not imply endorsement of any SAML-based specification, and reserves the right not to list all received submissions." As written (even given the disclaimer in the final sentence), I could imagine someone parsing the first sentence's clause structure to infer that the "no endorsement" clause applies only to specifications that the SSTC decides not to list.
>
> --jl
--
Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Products, Technologies, and Standards eve.maler @ sun.com
