Benjamin Kaduk <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:28:26AM +0300, Ivaylo Petrov wrote: >> Thank you Robert for your review! From this discussion [1] it appears that >> indeed the intention of the usage of the term bag was not to make any >> assumptions about the uniqueness of the elements. I am taking a note to >> make that clear in the document regardless of the conclusion of that >> discussion. >> >> [1]: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/VLv2E6wcGkC4YY-vFMRxnEAXrXo/
> There is also some precedent for the use of "bag" for this type of thing;
> consider, e.g., https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7292#section-4.2.3 .
Yes! I was trying to make allusions to some place in PKIX where bag was used.
I understand Carsten's objection that it's mathematically incorrect.
I don't care one way or another.
-- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ ] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
