RE: [legalxml-enotary] Two items for consideration by eNotary TC

["John Messing" <jmessing@law-on-line.com>]

Let it be so.

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [legalxml-enotary] Two items for consideration by eNotary
> TC
> From: Arshad Noor <arshad.noor@strongauth.com>
> Date: Fri, August 01, 2008 11:41 am
> To: John Messing <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
> Cc: laurent liscia <laurent.liscia@oasis-open.org>,  James Bryce Clark
> <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>,  Carol Geyer <carol.geyer@oasis-open.org>,
>  legalxml-enotary <legalxml-enotary@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> 
> Maybe this is something that OASIS pays for, John.  OASIS as
> a whole, benefits from the "branding" with the eNotarized icon,
> so this need not come from the LegalXML SC.
> 
> I don't believe this is something that will come from the 2008
> budget.  Based on my recent experience with the EKMI Spec process,
> even if I work on getting a DRAFT eNotary Specification based on
> the XSD now, I can only commit to the spec being ready by the end
> of September.  Since we haven't all agreed that the XSD is fine,
> the spec is more than likely going to be a late October or mid-
> November deliverable.  (This is still in-line with the projected
> dates for this process, which was the end of 2008).
> 
> Assuming that we're all OK with the content of the spec, the 
> earliest I see it going for Public Review would then be Jan 2009.
> That puts us into March for the end of Public Review and then the
> TC addresses comments, and finally the standards-vote.  So, while 
> the XSD and the Specification can be ready befoer the end of 2008 
> (as originally planned), the formal standard is more likely only 
> by Spring 2009.
> 
> If we assume that we want the Conformance Test Tool and the Icons
> to be available at the time the standard comes out, this needs to
> be budgeted only for 2009.  And again, this is probably something
> that the OASIS Board itself might pay for given the value and
> visibility it brings to all of OASIS.
> 
> Arshad
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Messing" <jmessing@law-on-line.com>
> To: "Arshad Noor" <arshad.noor@strongauth.com>
> Cc: "laurent liscia" <laurent.liscia@oasis-open.org>, "James Bryce Clark" <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>, "Carol Geyer" <carol.geyer@oasis-open.org>, "legalxml-enotary" <legalxml-enotary@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 1, 2008 11:49:57 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: RE: [legalxml-enotary] Two items for consideration by eNotary TC
> 
> 1. Who pays for it and out of what budget? If LegalXML, it must come
> from the Steering Committee, and I am afraid that well may be dry for
> eNotary at this point, given the allotments for this year.
> 2. LegalXML branding has been an issue that has spanned committees, and
> I think this would again be a Steering Committee issue, and not one only
> for the TC.
> 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [legalxml-enotary] Two items for consideration by eNotary TC
> > From: Arshad Noor <arshad.noor@strongauth.com>
> > Date: Fri, August 01, 2008 9:34 am
> > To: legalxml-enotary <legalxml-enotary@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > Cc: laurent.liscia@oasis-open.org,  James Bryce Clark
> > <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>,  Carol Geyer <carol.geyer@oasis-open.org>
> > 
> > 
> > Gentlemen (and Carol),
> > 
> > Thinking about the eNotary specification that we plan to put
> > out this year for electronically notarized documents, and after
> > some discussions with people on this topic, I believe there are
> > two important items of work that this TC must contemplate
> > producing along with the XML Schema Definition (XSD) standard.
> > These are:
> > 
> > 1) A testing tool to test eNotarized documents for conformance
> >    with the forthcoming OASIS standard; and
> > 2) Visual representation marks for eNotarized documents that
> >    are standardized across applications.
> > 
> > The first is critical to application developers - as well as 
> > the courts - since there must be a single tool that can be
> > referenced in the event there are disputes between two different
> > implementations of software which deal with eNotarized documents
> > and that produce different results.  The standard OASIS testing
> > tool will allow developers to test their software implementations 
> > for conformance with the TC's spec BEFORE they release their SW,
> > thus ensuring that their software does not produce different 
> > results for sample eNotarized documents.
> > 
> > The second is equally critical - but to end-users and relying
> > parties who would appreciate a consistent representation of an
> > eNotarized document across applications.  While software may have
> > passed the conformance test in #1, if each vendor chooses to
> > display the result of verifying an eNotarized document with its
> > own icons/representations, it could lead to confusion in the
> > industry despite the OASIS standard.
> > 
> > I would propose that this TC take up these two work-items and 
> > create the conformance tool and visual icons so that the value 
> > of the OASIS eNotary standard is not diluted.
> > 
> > To that extent I would also propose that, after the TC has come to 
> > an agreement on these work-items, it put out RFP's for the creation
> > of these artifacts.  The terms, ownership, licensing, etc. can all
> > be worked out in conjunction with OASIS staff (who are copied on
> > this e-mail for expediency).
> > 
> > I would also recommend that, while OASIS can make the conformance
> > testing tool freely available to adopters, the visual icons should
> > be restricted for use by only OASIS members, and only if they have 
> > shown conformance with the tool through an independent testing 
> > process.  Not only does this reinforce the value of an OASIS 
> > membership, but it protects the "brand" of an OASIS-compliant 
> > eNotarized document.  For end-users who will have to deal with 
> > eNotarized documents in their software, seeing standardized icons 
> > in a consistent manner within eNotarized documents will enhance the 
> > value of the standard to the entire industry.
> > 
> > Thoughts/Reactions?
> > 
> > Arshad Noor
> > StrongAuth, Inc.
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php