RE: FW: FW: [dss] OASIS DSS - SignatureObject on Input

["Edward Shallow" <ed.shallow@rogers.com>]

Solely as it applies to the element changes, I can support your last
suggestion below. It's a good compromise. I still believe we need additional
supporting text on the larger timestamping topic, even if it is some well
placed sentences throughout the pertinent core section. These were the
subtlties we discussed in the thread of this week. Agreed ?

Ed 

-----Original Message-----
From: Trevor Perrin [mailto:trevp@trevp.net] 
Sent: September 17, 2004 11:07 AM
To: dss@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: FW: FW: [dss] OASIS DSS - SignatureObject on Input

At 10:39 AM 9/17/2004 -0400, Edward Shallow wrote:
>Good stuff Trevor I think we're getting there,

[...]

>   I think our little "transport element" debate is interesting, but my 
>larger unaddressed concern is the text across these 4 documents as they 
>pertain to timestamping.
>
>   Forget about the mechanics of SignaturePlacement, 
>DocumentWithSignature, SignatureObject, (Document, DocumentBaseType, 
>InputDocuments), Poperties (as they might apply to timestamps as Gregor 
>suggests), ReturnUpdatedSignature, UpdateSignatureOnly, AddTimestamp, 
>DocumentWithTemplate, SignatureForm, DocsToBeTimeStamped,
GenerateAsCounterSignature, and the list goes on ...
>
>   Can this "text improvement" issue, across all documents, be 
>officially addressed as an Action ?

We had talked about sometime producing a "roadmap" or "overview" document
describing the profiles and how they relate to each other.  I'm not sure it
makes sense for the Core to talk about which profiles you should use, for
example.


>*****************
>Now I'd like to get back to the DocumentWithSignature discussion and 
>the larger "transport element" issue.
>
>Collapsing DocumentWithSignature "in content but not in name" is simply 
>confusing, especially when one is allowed to qualify documents as 
>signatures through attributing.

Okay, then why don't we wrap a <Document> within a <DocumentWithSignature>
output, in the same way we've wrapped a <ds:KeyInfo> within an
<AdditionalKeyInfo>?  Preserving the <Document> addresses your concern, and
wrapping it in a special element addresses my concern that we want the
semantics of the returned element to be clear.


Trevor 


To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dss/members/leave_workgroup.php
.