Dave CROCKER wrote: > > For a base spec to say "the value is opaque" and another spec to come along > and > say "I'm announcing the particular, and possibly interesting, scheme that I > follow for creating that value, and I promise to conform to that scheme for > all > such values that I create" is just fine. >
The phrase "the value is opaque" could be interpreted to mean that it MUST NOT have any easily-discerned relationship to other things. So any message with an Author Signature (as defined in ADSP) would be in violation of the base spec. If it said "the value MAY be opaque" that's probably reasonable. -Jim _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html