One comment and one question

Dear DSS-X TC members,

    
1. I would like to pass you a comment received to the ETSI TS 119
      442 draft that was put in public domain for getting comments of
      stakeholders. Despite the fact the comment was raised for this
      document, I think that it actually is a comment for DSS-X core
      v2.0. The comment was as follows:

    
"XML elements are named as follows: 

      -    InputDocuments

      -    SignatureObject

      -    DocumentWithSignature

      JSON elements are named as follows:

      -    inDocs

      -    sigObj

      -    docWithSignature

      

      Why are the names different, regardless of the format used? If the
      names are the same, this will make the data more easily
      machine-processable.    For all elements, use the same name.

      For example:

      -    XML: InputDocuments

      -    JSON: inputDocuments"

    

    

    
The ETSI TS 119 442 just re-uses as much as possible the
      components specified in DSS-X core v2.0, so their names in XML and
      JSON are the same as the names in this document. That is why I
      consider that this is more a comment for DSS-X than for ETSI ESI.
      I understand that the rationale for making the names different has
      been the somehow implicit tendency within JSON to use shorter
      names than in XML. I ignore, though, whether you have made any
      trade-off between this implicit tendency and the potential burden
      that different names could put on developers according to the
      received comment. Could you please let us know your views on this
      particular issue?

    

    

    
2. I would like also to ask you a question, also related with a
      comment received. The comment was the following one:

    
"If the signature contains a ds:Manifest, and if the user wants
      to validate some documents from the ds:Manifest, in which element
      the associated documents should be included ?    

    

    
Maybe those documents could be included into InputDocuments."

    

    

    
My understanding that anything referenced within a signed
      ds:Manifest, within the VerifyRequest message should be passed to
      the server within a sub-component of dss2:InputDocuments. Could
      you please confirm this point?

    

      

      Thank you very much indeed for your feedback

    

      Best regards

    
Juan Carlos Cruellas.