[Review] Re: new "crypto" branch providing full PGP/MIME support

[Jameson Rollins]

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:08:39 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg at fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
> The outstanding question in my mind is whether those tags could be
> mistaken by a naïve user for meaning one of the other concepts.  Is
> there a way to name the tags to minimize that kind of confusion?

I think that would be difficult without using a long and cumbersome tag
name ("signed-but-not-verified"??).  But I think it might be a bit of a
moot point, since I kind of think that any user that actually
understands what a signature is, and what signature verification means,
is sophisticated enough to understand that the mere presence of a
signature does not mean it's been verified.  I could be wrong, though.

If folks have suggestions for disambiguating tag names that don't
themselves create further confusion on some other front, then I'm
inclined to just go with the simplest and most straightforward tag name.

jamie.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/2d63f36c/attachment.pgp>