- From: Smith, Ned <ned.smith@intel.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 16:04:15 -0800
- To: "Smith, Ned" <ned.smith@intel.com>, "'Jim Hendler'" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Cc: WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
On second look, that might have been Dan Connolly's wording - oops. -Ned > -----Original Message----- > From: Smith, Ned [mailto:ned.smith@intel.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:01 PM > To: 'Jim Hendler'; Dan Connolly; Jeff Heflin > Cc: WebOnt > Subject: RE: REQDOC: Need final input! > > > > *** PGP Signature Status: good > *** Signer: Ned M. Smith <ned.smith@intel.com> > *** Signed: 2/26/2002 4:00:31 PM > *** Verified: 2/26/2002 4:03:08 PM > *** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE *** > > 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 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim Hendler [mailto:hendler@cs.umd.edu] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 3:37 PM > > To: Dan Connolly; Jeff Heflin > > Cc: WebOnt > > Subject: Re: REQDOC: Need final input! > > > > > > At 4:33 PM -0600 2/26/02, Dan Connolly wrote: > > >On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 10:09, Jeff Heflin wrote: > > >[...] > > >> 6) "Integration of digital signatures" - Dan Connolly had > > volunteered to > > >> provide alternate wording. > > > > > >Crud... sorry... in case this is still helpful: > > > > > > The W3C XML Digital Signature specification is > > > an important building block for communication among > > > untrusted parties, which is important for many > > > ontology applications [, for example, ...?]. > > > It should be straightforward to use XML Signatures > > > with OWL. > > > > > > > all of the use cases need digital sigs, but the agents and ubiq > > computing probably the most of all of the ones in the current use > > cases, so I think if we just left out the missing "for example" > > from this and included those two as the motivators, this would be > > a good change > > -JH > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Professor James Hendler > > hendler@cs.umd.edu > > Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 > > Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. > > 301-405-6707 (Fax) > > AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland > > College Park, MD 20742 > > http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler > > > > > *** END PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE *** >
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2002 19:04:21 UTC