Bob,
Bob Jolliffe wrote:
> Hello Patrick
>
> Further to this afternoon's discussion I have added references to the
> ETSI XAdES standard and the W3C XML-DSIG (courtesy of Dennis). You
> can check what I have here:
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/office/DSigProposal.
>
>
Thanks!
> I'm also not sure about the URI to one-hop-from-what-you-really-want.
> I've fudged by saying "available via http://.." instead of "available
> at". Feels a bit like cheating, but this is the reference the ETSI TC
> gave us. It looks like you can bypass the whole rigmarole and go
> straight to http://pda.etsi.org/exchangefolder/ts_101903v010302p.pdf
> but perhaps they want readers to read the copyright notice and the
> blurb first.
>
>
Yes, the direct access works but I don't have a serious problem with
getting users to read their blurb. ;-)
To some degree it is a question of changing practice. To give a URL
really is a convenience to the reader, it doesn't really constitute a
reference to the work. That is the digital signature standard would
exist whether I can access it via http or if I have to request a paper
copy. Which would be ironic but not unknown. ;-)
BTW, with your current text:
> "Files within a package may have digital signatures applied. These
> digital signatures *shall* conform to the W3C XML Digital Signature
> specification [xml-dsig]. Applications *may* use extensions to the XML
> DSIG core specification, such as those required for implementation of
> XAdES signatures specified in ETSI TS 101 903 v1.3.2 [xades]. Digital
> signatures are stored in one or more files within the META-INF folder."
My suggestion was:
"Files within a package may have digital signatures applied. These
digital signatures *shall* conform to the W3C XML Digital Signature
specification [xml-dsig].
Note: Applications may use extensions to the XML DSIG core
specification, such as those required for implementation of XAdES
signatures specified in ETSI TS 101 903 v1.3.2 [xades]. **
Digital signatures are stored in one or more files within the META-INF
folder."
Reasoning that the permissive "may" is actually defined by the W3C
specification and not ODF.
It is a minor point and if you prefer the full paragraph style I have no
serious issue with it. It may be more acceptable to the interests who
want this feature to be stated that way.
Hope you are having a great day!
Patrick
--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)