Re: [Gnumed-devel] LaTeX contest for referral letter

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 02:18:40AM -0800, Jim Busser wrote:

> >> (in the output) ... "Any information below this point can not be assumed 
> >> valid and the above physician will not be held responsible."
> >> 
> >> ... was it meant to be wrapped inside a GPG signature?
> > 
> > Which would be useful on a printed sheet of paper how ?

> (a) if we are talking paper I did not understand how
> information above the point should be considered valid since
> it could have been altered

I would assume Rogerio meant to say "what seems like
original print can probably considered valid with reasonable
limits" whereas anything added or printed "onto the side" is
not endorsed by the physician signature below it.

I added a bit more wording to the effect of that, yes,
sometimes handwritten additions will appear on the letter
but they should be signed, dated, and stamped explicitely.

> (b) if we are talking providing the patient a digital copy
> of the output then maybe that could be signed but on
> thinking it through I am not sure whether you can have in a
> Latex document a GPG begin and end above and below the
> signed content where the signed content could be printed on
> paper whereas the GPG parts could be in non-printing
> sections of the document.

GPG allows for signatures external to the file (in a second
file, that is). It also allows for unwrapping the file from
its GPG envelope during verification. Both would require to
sign the entire file which seems reasonable.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346