Re: signatures vs sf-date

On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 4:09 PM Julian Reschke <>

> Bare items are simple; there's no optionality involved.
> What about a dictionary, where you're only looking for "x" (expected to
> be an integer), but the sender adds an extension parameter "y" as sf-date?
> A conforming parser (of the current spec) will reject the whole field
> value, and the recipient will not be able to see the value for "x".

Yeah, thats what happens in sfv, it fails the Dictionary parse and there's
no structured way to work around that :-(


Received on Monday, 23 January 2023 17:03:37 UTC