Am Do 01.05.2014, 23:34:30 schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor: > I tend to see it the other way; i'd want to know specifically how the > proposed information is supposed to be useful *first*, and then (if > it's a compelling enough case) we can talk about how to specify it. > > --ask-cert-level fails this test, for example. We don't actually make > use of that data in any certificate validation algorithm
This is a clear mix up of cause and effect. You don't discuss a new technical solution but you point at the rather trivial (because always given; otherwise no change would be necessary) fact that the *current* technical solution limits the use of this information. From that you conclude that no change is necessary. To me that is quite the opposite of your own demand. Hauke -- Crypto für alle: http://www.openpgp-schulungen.de/fuer/unterstuetzer/ http://userbase.kde.org/Concepts/OpenPGP_Help_Spread OpenPGP: 7D82 FB9F D25A 2CE4 5241 6C37 BF4B 8EEF 1A57 1DF5
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
