Re: [legalxml-enotary] ENML v.1 (Draft 1) Comments

[Arshad Noor <arshad.noor@strongauth.com>]

Thank you, Rolly.

I trust you saw the updates I've made to DRAFT 1, which includes
the ApostillizedDocument, Appendices E and F.

I have also added a separate document to the repository on the
security implications of ENML; I'd like the TC to decide if the
document belongs in the ENML specification or not.

Unless there are more corrections sent to me on DRAFT 2 (by the
end of this week), we will be done with this by next week.

Arshad

rolly.chambers@tprr.com wrote:
> Arshad -
> 
> I agree with the items Marc Aronson pointed out and with your responses. The initial draft was well done and the examples are very clear.
> 
> I have one question about the draft spec -- will Apps. C and E (which were not yet completed in the initial draft I reviewed), be available for review before the TC votes?
> 
> If I've overlooked these two appendices, my apologizes. Otherwise, I will want to review them before voting.
> 
> Thanks for your good work on the spec.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Rolly Chambers