RE: HM.Requirements: Legal (was Re: Long and Not Much to the Poi nt:Re: HM.applications-Profiling-Level of Details/Abstraction)

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

Agree.   We don't have to build one, but we do have 
to work with those being built.  I regard it like 
the EMOTE and VHML; the consumers who get here and 
make a contribution are likely to be considered first. 
That is how open standards processes work.


Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt Cagle [mailto:kurt@kurtcagle.net]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 6:08 PM
To: Sean B. Palmer
Cc: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: HM.Requirements: Legal (was Re: Long and Not Much to the
Poi nt: Re: HM.applications-Profiling-Level of Details/Abstraction)


> I'm working on an identification scheme that incorporates a digital
> signature, if that will be of any help. The "who defines this?" is
"legally
> controlled" by the person who owns the keypair. The system is still
limited
> to the interpretation of that system and the context of the transactions
> using those identifiers (an unsolvable problem, IMO), but the scope is a
> lot tighter because of the security and relative ease of use of digital
> signatures.

I think this is all that you can reasonably do, to be honest. A schema
should in general be independent of the transactions that the schema is used
in; we just need to insure that there is enough of a hook to make sure that
such can be implemented.

--Kurt


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>