key sig notation data in --with-colon mode?

Werner Koch wk at
Tue Oct 4 09:01:42 CEST 2005

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 03:19:38 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann said:

> If X.509 comes up with similar features, they will probably be
> distinct enough to justify a different format (and name) anyway.

No.  We can easily map signed attributes to notation data.  There is
actually no difference except that the name must be an OID which makes
up a perfect name. I'll soon implement such an attribute for gpgsm.

>   Suggestion: How about
>   --add-subpacket 20:3:24:%80%00%00%00%00%09%00%07MyFOO at FOOABCDEFG
>   as a command line option?

I don't see the need for it.  This puts too much OpenPGP knowledge
into GPGME.  For a full featured keylisting with all details, gpgme
might not be the right tool.  Remember the "made easy"?  It is already
too complicated.

We do have many many details in the OpenPGP format; The majority is of
no use for a user trying to encrypt/sign/verify something.



More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list