[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [ubl] MINUTES FROM EUROPE ASIA UBL WORKING SESSION WEDNESDAY6th JULY at 0800 UTC]
Forward to list as requested. Thanks. > One aspect that may or may not have been discussed here [1] is that > geographic, agreement, regulatory and other infrastructure conditions > may dictate what option is used - encapsulation and/or referencing. If > you look at the business document and the process it may be associated > with, is it advisable to dictate what option is used? Let me explain > briefly. If you look back at eCommerce Patterns [2], it talks some of > the boundaries here. While I agree that parties may specify what the > security criteria is and the mechanisms used, should UBL dictate what > they are rather than allowing the agreement, conditions and expectations > of the parties compiling and using the business document in a business > process define what mechanisms are selected. I realize I am an observer > but this, at least to me, is an important point that was worth raising. > Forgive me for stepping out of my observer box. Thanks. > > [1] I've also briefly scanned the Certificate of Origin documents too > but am not directly familiar with the detailed discussions on COO or how > to meet the requirements identified. > [2] cc: Jamie Clark here as he is an expert here....and I'm not but ebBP > long debated legally binding and shared intent (See latest specification > packages preparing for CD vote at: > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/documents.php?wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp (6 > packages uploaded 1 July 2005). eCommerce patterns: > http://www.ebxml.org/specs/bpPATT.pdf. > > > mcgrath: Attendees: > > Tim McGrath > > Thomas Lee > > Peter Borresen > > > > Given the limited attendance, we decided to concentrate this meeting > > on the topic of Digital Signatures. Peter and Thomas have an action > > tiem to prepare a white paper on this issue. > > > > TL: outlined the requirements from the Certificate of Origin > > document. This document is actually built up in stages by different > > orgnaizations, each of whom signs their respective parts. This also > > means the sequence of signing is significant as well. > > > > Two approaches have been identified: > > a. encapsulating the digital signature inside the document (the > > Crimson Logic approach) > > b. referencing the digital signature from the document and storing it > > externally (the DTTN and ebXML approach). > > > > Both have their strengths and weaknesses. > > > > Action Item: Peter will create a draft of how the Digital Signature > > could be referenced from a UBL document and pass to Thomas for his input. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]