Re: REQDOC: Need final input!

Ned,

>
> Not to split hairs, but the wording in the last line of Jeff Heflin's
> text might raise some flags. "It should be straightforward" may
> suggest we don't understand the basis of the interaction between XML
> Signatures and OWL.
>
> I recommend wording to the effect of:
> ...
> "XML Signatures and cononicalization transformations can be applied
> safely to OWL expressions because OWL conforms to the XML standard."
>
> - -Ned

What about the capability for OWL to deal with trust/provenance issues? If
anyone can say anything about anything (using RDF), we need a way to decide
what to reason about, that is, assertions might be filtered by XML sigs etc.
I certainly don't understand all the ways XML Sigs might interact with OWL.
In any case I hope such usage would be straightforward.

Jonathan