Just realized I made a mistake Reading.
In chapter 5.3.4.4 The Signature Information itâs used an example without
<ext:ExtensionURI>.
In chapter 5.3.4.8 A Signature Skeleton itâs used another example without
<ext:ExtensionURI>.
Of course <ext:ExtensionURI>
itâs not used because only
<ext:ExtensionContent> is the shown.
Iâm sorry about this mistake the other doubts remain.
Pedro Fernandes
DireÃÃo de Sistemas de InformaÃÃo
Rua Visconde de Seabra 3 | 1700-421 Lisboa | Tel: 212 469 549 (10549) | Fax: 212 469 541 | http://www.adp.pt
Tenha uma EcoAtitude. Imprima este e-mail
apenas se necessÃrio.
Esta mensagem e os ficheiros anexos podem conter informaÃÃo confidencial ou reservada. Se, por engano, receber esta mensagem, solicita-se que informe
de imediato o remetente e que elimine a mensagem e ficheiros anexos sem os reproduzir.
This message and any files herewith attached may contain confidential or privileged information. If you receive this message in error,
please notify us immediately and delete this message and any files attached without copying them in any way.
From: Pedro Fernandes
Sent: 3 de junho de 2019 18:21
To:
Subject: Urgent clarification regarding enveloped signature
Hi all!
I was Reading documentation regarding digital signature in this link
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.1/UBL-2.1.html#S-UBL-DIGITAL-SIGNATURES
In chapter 5.3.4.1 The Extension Metadata
it seems element <ext:ExtensionURI> with value âurn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:dsig:envelopedâ
is mandatory.
In chapter 5.3.4.4 The Signature Information itâs used an example without
<ext:ExtensionURI>.
In chapter 5.3.4.8 A Signature Skeleton itâs used another example without
<ext:ExtensionURI>.
In chapter 5.4 Digital Signature Examples
itâs used another example without <ext:ExtensionURI>.
In chapter 6.2 Digital Signature Conformance
itâs mentioned that âClaiming syntax conformance to the enveloped signature profile of UBL 2.1 requires (â) the <ext:Extension> element
is present in the UBL extension and has either urn:âoasis:ânames:âspecification:âubl:âdsig:âenveloped or urn:âoasis:ânames:âspecification:âubl:âdsig:âenveloped:âxades as
its valueâ.
My doubts:
If <ext:ExtensionURI> is mandatory, was it forgotten in the examples? Are the examples
right?
If for conformance reason <ext:Extension> is
required to have a value why is it never mentioned?
Is it a mistake and you really mean that
<ext:ExtensionURI>
is required to have a value?
Are you considering that <ext:ExtensionURI>
value is <ext:Extension> value?
Please accept my apologies if this is just a misunderstanding from my part due to English not being my native language.
Best regards
Pedro Fernandes
DireÃÃo de Sistemas de InformaÃÃo
Rua Visconde de Seabra 3 | 1700-421 Lisboa | Tel: 212 469 549 (10549) | Fax: 212 469 541 |
http://www.adp.pt
Tenha uma EcoAtitude. Imprima este e-mail
apenas se necessÃrio.
Esta mensagem e os ficheiros anexos podem conter informaÃÃo confidencial ou reservada. Se, por engano, receber esta mensagem, solicita-se que informe
de imediato o remetente e que elimine a mensagem e ficheiros anexos sem os reproduzir.
This message and any files herewith attached may contain confidential or privileged information. If you receive this message in error,
please notify us immediately and delete this message and any files attached without copying them in any way.
