[openpgp] Re: Key selection and other semantics

[Daniel Huigens <[e-mail]>]

Hi Andrew,

On Tuesday, October 6th, 2026 at 15:26, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
> I think the overall direction looks great. :-) I'd be happy to talk
> about unifying your section 1 with draft-certificates (although I will
> have to re-read the details); I think section 3 belongs in a separate
> "component key selection" document, which has been discussed on previous
> occasions but hasn't (yet) got traction.

Thanks! I agree :)

> I think we should keep a common terminology between documents. If we
> think the terminology currently defined in draft-hkp is suboptimal then
> we should probably update it before it escapes the WG... ;-)

Yeah, I was thinking about this as well.
I think that outside the HKPv2 draft, the term "canonical bundle"
doesn't make as much intuitive sense, because it isn't clear
what it's a bundle of (HKP only deals with certificates,
obviously, but this isn't true for other OpenPGP contexts).
So then it'd need to be "canonical certificate bundle",
but I'd prefer that to be the default, so to speak,
and use "sequence of TPKs" for a more loose collection
of certificates. If that sounds reasonable I can make an MR
to the HKPv2 draft.

Best,
Daniel