Action-9: Launch discussion on Baseline Profile on the TC mailinglist.

[Juan Carlos Cruellas <cruellas@ac.upc.edu>]

Dear all,

This message tries to close the action#009, launching the discussion on 
baseline profiles.

I put below the references to the emails in the DSS TC email archive, 
where the term was first used:

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dss/200703/msg00007.html

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dss/200703/msg00009.html

More specifically, the second one has a number of interesting ideas that 
could be the basis for further discussion. I copy them below:


1. creating "baseline" profiles (one for every "major use case" ( i.e. 
XML signatures(creation/validation), CMS  
signatures(creation/validation), XML timestamps(creation/validation), 
CMS timestamps(creation/validation)) would help a lot, in this way the 
implementers can choose which "packages" they do implement.

2. include in these "baseline profiles" the optional inputs/outputs that 
are specific for this kind of signature, so they don't mess in the other 
baseline profiles, and I would leave the common optional inputs / 
outputs in the core.

3. leave the security/transport protocols in the core, as  they are 
orthogonal to the "big use cases", so if there's no constraint in the  
"baseline profile", any of these protocols can be used.


Any thought?

Regards

Juan Carlos.