-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 01:25:14PM -0400, Ian Grigg wrote:
When the word "notarised signature" is used, is this
a term that has been tested against the legal meaning
of the words?
Specifically, the term has quite different significances
under civil code and common law. In the civil code, a
notary is a very important person, perhaps more significant
than an attorney. He or she has to study for 6 years to
obtain their qualification, and it is a tightly constrained
field (at least in the country I'm mildly familiar with).
The term "notary signature" should not imply any legal meaning
whatsoever. As you point out, it means different things to different
people in different places.
I can't imagine the terminology is a problem. After all, the terms
"signature", and "certification" mean different things in different
legal juristictions as well, and PGP has been using those terms for
over a decade.
If not, as a minimum, it might be a good idea to add
a statement that the use of the term is not meant to
draw from the legal definition(s) of same.
I'm okay with this if the WG thinks it is necessary, though if we're
going to go down that route, it would probably be simpler to put a
single sentence in the introduction disclaiming any legal standing for
terminology used in the whole document than it would be to add
specific notes to the notary section.
David
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-cvs (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://www.jabberwocky.com/david/keys.asc
iD8DBQE+1lee4mZch0nhy8kRAmC8AKCf4/EvXjuYkvabEs8IwXK3hlE/XACgr7+/
ntnmo2Iqd4wIFtYFVIowIU8=
=pfIG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----