FW: Extensibility Sentence

[Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>]

 From Ed,


>Hi Trevor,
>
>     As part of the process of closing off the requirements document, it was
>noted in the conference call of Aug 11th that the requirement on the subject
>of general extensibility and specifically "compound" or "stacked" operations
>be included in the text of the document so it may be closed.
>
>     Please refer to the suggested verbage below which I sent you and Nick
>last month. The invitation to tweak the sentence still stands.
>
>Cheers,
>Ed
>
>P.S. Additionally the "ProcessingOptions" element of the "OptionsType"
>structure was lost somewhere between the draft version distributed at the
>face-to-face by Juan-Carlos and the publishing of the subsequent draft
>entitled "dss-core-schema-00.xsd".
>
>The EPM profile will require this directive.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Edward Shallow [mailto:ed.shallow@rogers.com]
>Sent: July 17, 2003 2:49 PM
>To: Trevor Perrin (trevp@trevp.net)
>Cc: Gray Steve; 'pope@secstan.com'
>
>Hi Trevor,
>
>     On the last conference call I was tasked with sending you a sentence
>describing a general "extensibility" capability within the protocol. Try
>this ... Feel free to tweak.
>
>
>      "Support for additional service options characterized by scenarios like
>Verify and TimeStamp should be provided for more generally as part of an
>overall "extensibility framework". As such the introduction of various
>options or directives on core DSS service operations can be extended to
>support profile-specific requirements. This "extensibility framework" should
>be designed to support the notion of compound or stacked operations typified
>by the Verify and TimeStamp scenario as well as the more common notions of
>"selection of response elements" or "specification of signing attributes".
>
>Ed
>
>P.S. As usual, please post.