Clarify reusability of Validation of authority (3.2.5 vs. 4.2.1)

[defacto64]

Section 4.2.1 of the BR reads:

....The CA MAY use the documents and data provided in Section 3.2 to verify certificate information, or may reuse previous validations themselves, provided that the CA obtained the data or document from a source specified under Section 3.2 or completed the validation itself no more than 825 days prior to issuing the Certificate.

IMO this aspect is not crystal-clear with the current wording, so I would suggest to clarify that "previous validations" include Validation of authority (section 3.2.5). The doubt may arise because Validation of authority is arguably not part of "certificate information", unless this term is defined so to include it. The use of both expressions "certificate information" and "previous validations" within the same sentence, in a way as if they were synonyms, leads to ambiguity. Current practice is such that, in fact, Validation of authority is often reused by certificate management portals and the likes. I'd like this aspect to be clarified by suitably changing the wording above, leaving no room for interpretation.

[barrini]

Adriano to propose a text to clarify it

[aarongable]

I think there is a straightforward reading of:

The CA MAY [...] reuse previous validations themselves, provided that the CA obtained the data or document...

The "or" clause (which is elided by the [...] in my quote above), in my opinion, makes it clear that the CA may reuse the validation of authority.

[defacto64]

@aarongable
IMO it does not, or I would not have raised this issue.
However, so far its just my view against yours, so it would be useful to get opinions from other people.
At any rate, I will open a PR to propose a revision of language.

[defacto64]

Just opened #536