Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet

[lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Lutz Donnerhacke)]

* Hal Finney wrote:
>Lutz Donnerhacke, lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, writes:
>> I'm very unhappy with it. It seems to make no sense at all. Imagine a JPEG
>> of the owner of a key. Where should it inserted in the database? IMHO it's
>> related to the UserID. So simply use the URL subpacket of the signature page
>> or define an new one. But *do* *not* bind it to the key!
>
>The idea is that a userid describes information about the key holder:
>his name, and email address.  The attribute packet can describe other
>forms of information about the keyholder.  So conceptually it is an
>alternative to the userid, and should be placed at the same level in the
>hierarchy.

I see. Is is now allowed to add a zero certificate to the key as described
in the formal draft? Zero certificates can hold the key expiration time and
related entities. So defining a JPEG subtype in the signature allows to
bind it even to the key, but this cannot be certified by others.

/*
 * OpenPGP Reference implementation and specification to be
 * Author/Editor: Lutz.Donnerhacke@xxxxxxxxxxxx
 * Source is GPLed.
 */


%{
%}
%union{
}
%type <pubkey> public_key
%%

/* structure of a public key */
public_key:
	public_key_packet maybe_trust key_compromise
	{  $$=$1;
	   $$.revoked=1;
	}
	| public_key_packet maybe_trust signed_userIDs
	  {  $$=$1;
	     $$.userIDs=$3;
	  }
	| public_key_packet maybe_trust signed_userIDs subkeys
	  {  $$=$1;
	     $$.userIDs=$3;
	     $$.subkeys=$3;
	  }
	| public_key_packet maybe_trust zero_certificate signed_userIDs
	  {  $$=$1;
	     $$.userIDs=$3;
	  }
	| public_key_packet maybe_trust zero_certificate signed_userIDs subkeys
	  {  $$=$1;
	     $$.userIDs=$3;
	     $$.subkeys=$3;
	  }
;

%%%