IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Diffs for next draft

Florian Weimer <Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> Mon, 27 August 2001 14:41 UTC

Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA20390 for <openpgp-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:41:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) id f7RETCq14821 for ietf-openpgp-bks; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de (mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de [129.69.1.226]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7RETBD14816 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rusfw by mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de with local (Exim 3.22 #1) id 15bNNj-0002Ng-00 for ietf-openpgp@imc.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:28:51 +0200
To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
Subject: Re: Diffs for next draft
References: <p05100303b7aaf65aff68@[192.168.1.180]> <008601c12c52$1b6181c0$c23fa8c0@transarc.ibm.com> <p0510031fb7ab945664e5@[192.168.1.180]>
From: Florian Weimer <Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:28:51 +0200
In-Reply-To: <p0510031fb7ab945664e5@[192.168.1.180]> (Jon Callas's message of "Fri, 24 Aug 2001 16:42:36 -0700")
Message-ID: <tgn14l8tlo.fsf@mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>
Lines: 16
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) Emacs/20.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>

Jon Callas <jon@callas.org> writes:

> This is my point: I don't see an obvious best answer. Furthermore, 2440 is
> a data specification standard, not a user interface guide or software
> construction manual.

Yes, and I strongly suggest to keep it that way.  I might have uttered
a different opinion in the past, but after a closer look at the USEFOR
draft and the associated process I came to the conclusion that one
better clearly separates syntax and basic semantics on the one side
and higher level semantics (even layer 8 stuff) on the other side.

-- 
Florian Weimer 	                  Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE
University of Stuttgart           http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/
RUS-CERT                          +49-711-685-5973/fax +49-711-685-5898

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email