Subject: Re: registration authorities

From: Peter Sylvester <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:45:48 +0100 (MET)

> >Doesn't 3739 say:
> >
> >    The profile is however not limited to Qualified
> >    Certificates and further profiling may facilitate specific local
> >    needs.
> 
> yes, but what i said was that syntactically, inclusion of the 
> extension defined for QC's will generally be interpreted as 
> indicating a QC. In the U.S. we have a saying:
>    "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck."
> 
No, it is a video game. :-) 

      *  Some editorial clarifications have been made to introductory
         sections to clarify that this profile is generally applicable
         to a broad type of certificates, even if its prime purpose is
         to facilitate issuance of Qualified Certificates.

> I think this saying will apply here, whether the cert was issued 
> under QC guidelines or not.

I tend to interprete the phrases as a warning to indicate exactly the
contrary.

---

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:23:38 -0500

>No, it is a video game. :-)

yes, it probably is!

>I tend to interprete the phrases as a warning to indicate exactly the

I agree that the text says one can use the extension more broadly, 
and I agree that, therefore, IF one feels a need to name an RA in a 
cert, this is the standard way we have defined to do that, but I 
would still bet that folks who see an extension named qc-Statement 
will infer that its a qualified cert ...

Steve