RE: AS2 XML requirements (was Re: HL7 Standards Process)

response follow

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gunther Schadow [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:19 PM
> To: Rishel,Wes
> Cc: '[email protected]'; 'Kit (Christopher) Lueder'; 'Kepa Zubeldia'; Rik
> Drummond; CLEM; Gary Crough; Beth Morrow; David@Drummondgroup. Com;
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: AS2 XML requirements (was Re: HL7 Standards Process)
> 
> 
> All these worries are worth thinking about to some extent, but then
> there is the sheer pragmatic fact that the world won't stop spinning
> and e-signatures are here to stay in some form. In fact, the ESIGN
> act -- according to my reading -- is quite loose in what it requires
> of a signature. I see no demand for screenshots or XSL in it. I 
> see simply the statmement that no for of a signature can be denied 
> a legal status merely on the basis that it is not "in written form".
> Much of the rest is left open to hopefully close investigation of 
> each individual case that goes to the courts.

If the ESIGN act is the one that passed last summer it is primarily about
the law, not about technology. As I recall it says three things"

1) No law shall make an electronic signature invalid, solely because it is
an electronic signature; this clears the legal pathway and overrides state
laws to the contrary, but it doesn't actually say what does constitute a
legal e-sig

2) a valid contract can be formed by an electronic signature as long as both
parties agree to what constitutes an e-signature; so if Amazon.com wants to
accept my entering a credit care number and pressing a button that says SEND
as a signature, and if I understand that I am signing something and what I
am signing, that is cool. If Ford decides that it wants something more
tangible when it sells me a car on credit over the Web that is cool, too. 

3) the Secretary of Commerce shall promulgate further standards about
esignature to facilitate commerce. I am wondering if these regulations are
out. I have not seen them.

My primary concern is not about what constitutes an electronic signature. It
is that EDIINT has a clear purpose and that purpose is different than that
of being a digital implementation of an electronic signature. If HL7 or ASTM
tries to pass EDIINT with the intention of making into a legal electronic
signature we will spend endless hours debating all the issues that Gunther
and I discussed and EDIINT STILL won't become a standard.