The legal standard you are trying to achieve here is constructive notice.
IANAL but I have spent a considerable time with lawyers and the
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) tring to establish an international
registry for notice documents such as would achieve constructive notice. It
is a very hard problem.
Instead I would suggest that you abandon the keyword approach entirely and
use a referential mechanism based on URIs alone. It is not necessary for the
mechanism to guarantee that the end user achieve constructive notice
acceptable to a court of relevant jurisdiction, it is merely necessary to
give the user the ability to achieve it.
The best way to achieve constructive notice would be to use a URI that was
a-priori bound to a mechanism that ensured that the name could be resolved
to a unique document, i.e. a URN. This is actually quite difficult in
practice since there are not many URN sequences that are established in a
manner that would be likely to be considered notice. The IETF document
sequence is arguably one such sequence.
A more practical alternative would be to register the policy document with a
third party who made some undertaking to make the document available for
reading at any time, track modifications to the document, etc.
Phill
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg