Re: Whither the 0x40 timestamp signature?

[Jon Callas <jon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> I'm not necessarily requesting that 0x40 be fleshed out and clarified:
> I'd be just as content to see it dropped.  If, as I assume, the 0x40
> is just the same as the 0x50 with a different (human) interpretation,
> then perhaps we should just drop it.  If people want to assign human
> interpretations to their signatures, let them use notations.

As I remember, it stays there for the same reason that some other 
seldom-to-never-used
signature types are there: for backwards compatibility with their never 
being used. They are there for the same reason there is old stuff in my 
garage -- we hope to use it someday.

I'm not sure spring cleaning is warranted, but it's easy enough, if 
people think so.

	Jon