Re: [pkcs11] Proposal: Define CKA_JAVA_MIDP_SECURITY_DOMAIN constants

[Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>]

On 6/26/2013 2:35 PM, Stef Walter wrote:
> > > Should we just choose CKV_? That's the option that seems more broadly
> > > >>acceptable. In that case, will you make a proposal to update the OTP
> > > >>stuff?
> > >
> > >So CKV_OTP_*, CKV_MIDP_* and CKV_CERTCAT_*?
> Yeah, that's what I'd prefer.
>
> > >Sure I can't talk you into
> > >CKCM_ and CKCC_?
> It's just that these really start to be unreadable.

OK - but then you have to enumerate each item and the enum type it is 
associated with (as part of the definitions - maybe put a header on the 
table where the constants are defined that relate it back to the typedef?

Mike