W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: Multiple signatures in a sig_block

From: Todd S. Glassey <Todd.Glassey@www.meridianus.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 11:58:03 -0700
Message-ID: <023c01bed3aa$f6510b00$0b0aff0c@lab.gmtsw.com>
To: "Barb Fox \(Exchange\)" <bfox@Exchange.Microsoft.com>, "'Chris Smithies'" <Chris_Smithies@penop.com>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
How do you tie multiple signature blocks together into a cohesive document
structure?

Todd
----- Original Message -----
From: Barb Fox (Exchange) <bfox@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
To: 'Chris Smithies' <Chris_Smithies@penop.com>; <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 7:51 AM
Subject: RE: Multiple signatures in a sig_block


> Chris:
>
> This is a subtle but very important point: having multiple signature
> elements within a SigBlock has nothing to do with the number of signers.
> Each signer can sign the same document independently or indicate that he
is
> also signing in the other signatures with a single signature in the
> SigBlock. This is a much cleaner way to get the evidence you're looking
for
> and is easy to do with an XML signature.
>
> --Barbara Fox
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Smithies [mailto:Chris_Smithies@penop.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 6:59 AM
> To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
> Subject: Multiple signatures in a sig_block
>
>
>
>
> The value of allowing multiple Signature elements in a SigBlock
(sig_block,
> signatureBlock, whatever...) is that in the future, multiple signing
> technologies may well be used in the course of the same transaction, with
> the same intent, by the same person, governing the same content. It may
> also be that different signature standards are required by different
> recipients of the document. It would clearly be efficient and useful from
a
> procedural and evidentiary point of view for these signatures to be
> combined together into a single entity.
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 21 July 1999 14:45:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:07 GMT