Resurrecting DWF

Terrific work on the process but I'm struggling to to wrap my head round the consequences of adopting the CVE- prefix.

Ultimately I can't agree with the assertion that CVE means vulnerability. I understand it to mean an identifier that I can look up, potentially with automatic tools in "the CVE list". Thus having identifiers that appear to be CVE numbers that are not included in the CVE list seems to be massively confusing, especially so on an identifier format that *explicitly* includes a namespace to describe the originator of an identifier.

In other words using CVE in this context appears to be exactly the sort of misrepresenation regarding the originator that trademark law was intended to prevent. Of course that is not to say that it will or won't apply in this case... but it is the societal benefit trademarks are intended to provide.