editorial issues in the CAEP spec under public review

[TakahikoKawasaki]

txn example values

txn example values should be strings, not integers, as per Section 2.2. Core SET Claims of RFC 8417: Security Event Token (SET).

- "txn": 8675309,
+ "txn": "8675309",

event_timestamp example values

event_timestamp example values should be seconds since the Unix epoch, not milliseconds, as per Section 2. Optional Event Claims of the CAEP spec.

- "event_timestamp": 1615304991643
+ "event_timestamp": 1615304991

3.2.2. Examples, Figure 7

              "reason_user": {
                  "en": "You're no longer connected to a trusted network.",
                  "it": "Non sei piu connesso a una rete attendibile."
              },
- 
              "claims": {
-                 "trusted_network": "false"
+                 "trusted_network": false
              }
          }

3.8. Risk Level Change

- connection to insecure pheripheral device
+ connection to insecure peripheral device

3.8.1. Event Specific Claims

- as identified by the transmitter
+ as identified by the Transmitter

- Value MUST be one of LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH
+ Value MUST be one of LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH.

[TakahikoKawasaki]

The spec contains the follwing note at some places:

NOTE: The event type URI is wrapped, the backslash is the continuation character.

However, in fact, there isn't a single example in the CAEP specification of an event type URI being wrapped using a backslash. (Such examples do exist in the RISC specification, though.)

So, the notes should be removed.

[TakahikoKawasaki]

I've created PR #279 for this issue.