W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Poll: Limiting KeyValue to a single Instance?

From: Carl Ellison <cme@acm.org>
Date: 22 Feb 2001 07:10:54 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20010222071054.00974610@spiritone.com>
To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: "Carl Ellison" <cme@acm.org>, "TAMURA Kent" <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, kent@trl.ibm.co.jp, bal@microsoft.com, cwallace@erols.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 06:50 PM 2/21/01 -0500, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote:
>Carl: I'm not sure if you argument is for multiple elements in general 
>(which is already permitted), or the possibility of multiple KeyValues 
>(which we are discussing, and I thought you previously opposed)?

I imagine having to support multiple formats of certificate in the chain
backing up one verification key.  I can also imagine having multiple chains
backing a single key, of the same or different formats.  I am not enough of
an XML expert to say which schema modifications (if any are needed at all)
achieve that result the best.  I was hoping to leave that to the real experts
on this list.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2

iQA/AwUBOpUr/XPxfjyW5ytxEQLNnACeME9QDWiVoEvyY1WUXeFja86Ox+wAnivv
tV3D5FEtBnTf1Ry8Ig0/M89g
=qecu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison         cme@acm.org     http://world.std.com/~cme |
|    PGP: 08FF BA05 599B 49D2  23C6 6FFD 36BA D342                 |
+--Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.-+
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 10:11:18 GMT

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