12.10 (Support for Versioning and Extensibility) in OPC

[Francis Cave]

I understand your reasoning. However, is there a risk that, if we delete this subclause now, we may have to re-introduce something similar when we eventually agree how we’re going to revise OPC to support XAdES? The ability to carry different signature versions was one of the possibilities that was discussed during the meeting in Seattle in 2017.

 

Francis

 

 

 

From: eb2mmrt at gmail.com <eb2mmrt at gmail.com> On Behalf Of MURATA Makoto
Sent: 12 April 2018 14:08
To: SC34 <e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org>
Subject: 12.10 (Support for Versioning and Extensibility) in OPC

 

I am wondering if we really need this subclause.

 

The only normative thing here is the prohibition

of the MCE namespace within OPC-specific Object

element.  The rest is informative.  12.10.2 is

about future versions.  12.10.3 is just a vague

advice to format designers.   

 

Should we move the prohibition to the subclause 

for OPC-specific Object elements and delete 

this subclause?

 

Regards,

Makoto

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20180416/22d1987c/attachment.html>