RE: [legalxml-econtracts] Signature Areas

["John McClure" <jmcclure@hypergrove.com>]

John Messing asks:
How would this proposal handle XMLDSIG for security of digital signatures?

Inconsistencies between the data in the dsig envelope and the information marked
up in the document, is an application-level concern in my opinion. Is this what
you're asking ?
Thanks,
John


>Jason wrote:
>Surely the signature - whatever elements be used to represent it - goes inside
>the grammatical para <p>, given that that's how the author
>conceptualised it (as indicated by the text and the colon)?
>

You're right about this. It must go inside the <p>. Nevertheless, I definitely
favor inline elements to represent the essential information for a signature. I
do not (presently) favor a formal container element for the inline signature
elements.


>If you say that it doesn't, then isn't this a first exception to the
>idea that a grammatical para encapsulates things which are
>conceptually part of it?  (And just another indication of the
>trouble the grammatical para causes ;) )
>
>cheers,
>
>Jason
>
>
>
>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/legalxml-econtracts/member
>s/leave_workgroup.php.