requirements - signature types limited to those based on XML DSig (3.2.2)

[<Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>]

I propose we focus the scope on XML Signatures.

I believe when we went through the requirements that the point Merlin made was that we should design the details of the request/response protocol such that we could extend it to non XML Signature types of signature in the future with less effort. I do not think this meant that we should require support for all types of signatures.

I suggest we change 3.2.2 to only list XML Signatures and profiled variants like a Timestamp signature since this is our focus.

regards, Frederick
 
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia Mobile Phones


> > >----
> > >3.2.1
> > >I suggest we remove the bullet "Extensible to others" since
> > binary and XML
> > >pretty much covers it.
> >
> > I'll do that, unless people disagree.
> >
> I am loath to claim that the DSS protocol is generic to all signature
> syntaxes.  We can provide a "Bucket" to carry information 
> required for other
> types of signature but I am not sure how meaning that is.  If 
> this can be
> achieved all well and good but at the moment I would prefer 
> not to change
> the requirements that we are commiting to support.
> 
>