Ian G wrote: >> I'm sure that (for example) a signature scheme done by a handful of >> committed people >> as a Firefox extension would likely do much better than a W3C or OASIS WG >> could >> even dream of.
>No doubt there whatsoever. The notion that W3C or any of the other >acronyms can do a signature scheme would have to face the tough test >unravelling the 2 decades of mistakes in electronic signing. No chance >whatsoever. That is exactly my thought. >The only way it can be done is a small dedicated team, but even that is >necessary not sufficient. That may be true but I see some steps here that could be needed and that may even include creating something BAD so that we can move forward and maybe come up with something that a majority think is GOOD. The German speaking countries will never accept anything of the kind I work with (simple, not trying to solve things that doesn't really have a solution), but they should be able to use an XML extension protocol scheme at least. Anders -- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
