David Srbecky wrote:
Hello,
I suggest that 'Image Attribute Subpacket' is renamed to 'Photo ID
Subpacket' or anything similarly specific. 'Image Attribute Subpacket'
defines data type, but not what the data actually represent. What if
user stored two or more images? How do you guess what the individual
attributes hold?
Er, that doesn't sound likely. What happens if someone
assumes that the image is an ID because OpenPGP said so?
The OpenPGP philosophy is to say nothing that it cannot
cryptographically show. What a photo contains cannot be
so shown.
For example, what if someone stores Photo ID and company logo? How do
you differentiate them? I suggest this one is specified to be a Photo ID
and any other content must be stored elsewhere.
Only people can determine the difference between a
Photo ID and a company logo. It's up to them, the
tech plays no part in this. You might be suggesting
that a user-signed comment be appended to the subpacket.
Bear in mind that this group is in "last call" so any
suggested changes should be pretty darn urgent.
iang