Oasis will soon present for public review eNotarization Markup Language
(ENML)
Version 1.0 which is a proposed standard to represent a notarized document
in
XML. It is available in several formats at
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/documents.php?wg_abbrev=legalxml-enotar
y
One of the
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Gerard Ashton wrote:
Concatenate the epoch time at the time this ID value is being
generated ; the epoch time is the number of seconds elapsed since
00:00:00 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) January 01,
1970 (not counting leap seconds)
2. It has all the
In message: f21e028c02794c7bb6cba28e2...@grendel
Gerard Ashton ashto...@comcast.net writes:
:Concatenate the epoch time at the time this ID value is being
:generated ; the epoch time is the number of seconds elapsed since
:00:00:00 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)
The URL to the OASIS document didn't work for me, so it's hard to
evaluate the reasoning behind the choice of format here. What exactly
is the use case they are trying to satisfy? That said, I'm with
Tony. This seems like what ISO 8601 was designed for. If not ISO
8601, how about
Poul-Henning Kamp said:
It would have been even better to write:
An ISO C time_t timestamp.
ISO C doesn't define the type, format, or meaning of time_t - it can even
be floating point or (IIRC) a structure.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler,
cl...@davros.org
In message 20090217210518.gd91...@davros.org, Clive D.W. Feather writes:
Poul-Henning Kamp said:
ISO C doesn't define the type, format, or meaning of time_t - it can even
be floating point or (IIRC) a structure.
No, it must be an arithmetic type.
Okay (I didn't have the standard in front of
Poul-Henning Kamp said:
ISO C doesn't define the type, format, or meaning of time_t - it can even
be floating point or (IIRC) a structure.
Okay (I didn't have the standard in front of me). That still allows
floating point.
And that wouldn't matter, the objective is to make a random number.
On Tue 2009-02-17T20:53:43 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
This is a variant of the UUID madness that somebody came up with
because they didn't want to run a registry or use the existing
well-structured process (ISO OID's) and though that the eventual
collisions probably doesn't matter
, 2009 3:48 PM
To: Leap Second Discussion List
Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] A new use for Pre-1972 UTC
The URL to the OASIS document didn't work for me ...
___
LEAPSECS mailing list
LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Rob Seaman wrote in part:
Creating an ID that is guaranteed unique is not a trivial task,
especially if (as one suspects is true here) a central server is out
of the question.
I'm not familiar with the details of OID, but in general, it would be
desireable to have the option to
leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com wrote on 02/17/2009 04:17:20 PM:
On Tue 2009-02-17T20:53:43 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
This is a variant of the UUID madness that somebody came up with
because they didn't want to run a registry or use the existing
well-structured process (ISO
They avoid the issue by piggybacking on the current model. A Notary
Public has a commission assigned by some locale. I'll take their word
for it that this breaks down by country/state. (One could wish they
called this province or locale or some such.) The SHA disambiguates
the case of
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
And that would be perfect, because then there is even less chance of
you creating a random identifier that is identical to mine.
Remember, this is a write-only timestamp, its only purpose is to
provide time-changing bits. What those bits mean does not matter.
There
Rob Seaman wrote in part:
Actually, there is a failure of the current scheme in the document. A
notary is per country/state pair. But about a third of the U.S.
states and presumably many provinces in other countries are split by
timezones
Notaries are usually allowed to
Gerard Ashton wrote:
(I deliberately didn't say county or parish since I think
Louisiana is one of the exceptions.)
And of course, four of the states are actually commonwealths :-)
Rob
___
LEAPSECS mailing list
LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com
On 17 Feb 2009 at 14:27, Rob Seaman wrote:
Creating an ID that is guaranteed unique is not a trivial task,
especially if (as one suspects is true here) a central server is out
of the question.
If the ID includes as one of its elements a fully qualified domain
name, and the owner/operator
16 matches
Mail list logo
