RE: [legalxml-enotary] Groups - Comments on Phase I Deliverable (eNotary XSD) (Phase-I-Deliverable-Comments.pdf) uploaded

["David E. Ewan" <dewan@speakeasy.net>]

All -- Looks like we're moving right along.  I'd like to comment on Arshad's response to one of my comments regarding Signer ID.

I've re-thought my position, and I now believe that the entire SignerID element is more properly relegated to a journal entry/function and does not belong in the document itself.  After all, the hallmark of getting the notary's signature (electronic or otherwise) is that the notary will not sign UNLESS the principal signer has been identified to the satisfaction of the notary as required by the jurisdiction's laws.  How the notary does/did this is immaterial to me if I am relying on the notarized document.  I'm allowed to (if not expected to) rely on the document precisely because the notary's signature is there saying to me that the notary has identified the document signer(s) as required by law.  That's the whole point of having a notarized document -- all the person's personally identifying information does NOT have to be set forth at length in the document.  If we add all this information back into the document, we not only run afoul of the privacy laws, but also somewhat defeat the whole purpose of having notaries.

So, my preference would be to omit the SignerID element in its entirety.

If SignerID is retained, the IDDocumentNumber and IDExpirationDate should be omitted (not made optional, but omitted) for the privacy reasons I expressed previously.  IDIssuedBy should be either omitted or changed to be optional, and PersonallyKnownTo added as Arshad suggested (either method Arshad described seems acceptable).

I do wonder about having the enumerated list of IDDocumentType -- doesn't this artificially limit the schema to currently existing document types and preclude future documents which may be acceptable or even required as the various laws in this area develop?  In my mind, this reinforces my conclusion above that the entire SignerID element should be omitted, since the notary's signature says that the notary identified the document signer according to whatever laws/rules/regulations existed at the time.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: arshad.noor@strongauth.com [mailto:arshad.noor@strongauth.com] 
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 3:26 PM
To: legalxml-enotary@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-enotary] Groups - Comments on Phase I Deliverable (eNotary XSD) (Phase-I-Deliverable-Comments.pdf) uploaded

The document named Comments on Phase I Deliverable (eNotary XSD)
(Phase-I-Deliverable-Comments.pdf) has been submitted by Arshad Noor* to
the OASIS LegalXML eNotarization TC document repository.

Document Description:
The combined comments on the XSD for the eNotary TC's specification on
e-notarized documents, along with responses from some TC members and the
consultant.

View Document Details:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-enotary/document.php?document_id=28389

Download Document:  
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-enotary/download.php/28389/Phase-I-Deliverable-Comments.pdf


PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email application
may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may be able to copy and paste
the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.

-OASIS Open Administration
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3131 (20080526) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3131 (20080526) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com