[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?

• To: Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...>
• Subject: Re: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
• From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:30:31 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton
• References: <DC65AE678B89004B9CCB202E19482CC73BBC0B@m...> <3F9FC613.CD17A0A7@b...> <6.0.0.22.2.20031029141423.02929b20@p...>

Hi Dave,

We certainly can't assume that all electronic forms are accessible. Of
course, given that this was a federal-sponsored initiative accessibility
was one of the main topics. There was an Accessibility subteam
(described in more detail in the URL I provided in my previous e-mail),
and one of the recommendations at the end states that it should be
ensured that "e-forms support Section 508 accessibility requirements.
This is a critical requirement, mandated by law.".

Kind Regards,
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton

Dave Pawson wrote:
> 
> At 13:52 29/10/2003, Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> >Earlier this year, the U.S. Federal CIO Council conducted an "E-Forms
> >for E-Gov" pilot in which I participated (PureEdge did as well). One of
> >the points that was brought out in Section 6.7 (Archival Records Domain)
> >of the final report [1] was the importance of binding together
> >presentation, content, and context:
> >
> ><Quote>
> >Briefly, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
> >guidlines require that the "presentation", "content", and "context" must
> >be bound together in such a way that they can be demonstrated to belong
> >to the same transaction. This may mean physically combining these into a
> >single physical file, or ensuring that they are bound together through
> >some other trusted means, such as electronic hashes and signatures. In
> >addition, any signature must be applied to this combination of
> >presentation, content, and context, and the authentication process must
> >ensure integrity.
> >
> >For most government applications, E-Forms solutions must be designed and
> >selected with these core archival requirements in mind.
> ></Quote>
> 
> I wonder how that aligns with the 508 accessibility requirements?
> Or do we assume that all electronic forms are accessible.
> 
> I wonder if that was addressed by the pilot.
> 
> regards DaveP
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

begin:vcard 
n:Chiusano;Joseph
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.bah.com
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
version:2.1
email;internet:chiusano_joseph@b...
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano
end:vcard

• References:
  • RE: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
    • From: "Mark Seaborne" <MSeaborne@o...>
  • Re: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
    • From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
  • Re: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
    • From: Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
• Next by Date: RE: Microsoft Hypes Up XUL As The Greatest Expiriment S ince Adam And Eve
• Previous by thread: Re: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
• Next by thread: Re: InfoPath Digital Signature controversy?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread