Subject: This draft or next?

From: Jon Callas <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:39:59 -0700

Late last night, I replied to Werner, not to the list. Here's his reply to
me, from which you can figure out my reply.

	Jon

To: Jon Callas <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Diffs for next draft
From: Werner Koch <[email-masked]>
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
X-PGP-KeyID: 621CC013
X-Request-PGP: finger://[email-masked]
Date: 23 Aug 2001 10:00:48 +0200
Lines: 25

Jon,

[It seems that you didn't post to the list.]

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:26:17 -0700, Jon Callas said:

> No. A byte vector seemed like a reasonable thing. I suppose we can do a bit
> vector. Does anyone else have an opinion.

I have no problem with that, it is just that other attributes use bit
vectors.  Let's keep it as it is.  Can we start to use it and change
our keys to include feature flags?

> Let's put this on the list of things to do after this draft for the next one.

> John wants to push to a new RFC. Here are three open issues.

Okay.

  Werner

-- 
Werner Koch        Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur
g10 Code GmbH      et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est.
Privacy Solutions                                        -- Augustinus