Was thinking more about the scenario of unequipping and then re-equipping using the original attestation/signature.
Considering that requipping is done as an explicit action, and only by the recipient (or msg.sender), I feel that us accommodating for “requipping a burnt ABT only using new signatures” being a redundant scenario. Once I (as a recipient of an ABT) have the attestation that I can mint an ABT, I am essentially able to use it whenever. The attestations curently do not have a lifecycle of their own and are stateless. To introduce state and consider for it’s mutation over a course of time, I believe would belong to a new spec. For example, checkout attest.sh which maintains a base layer of attestations that indeed have a lifecycle i.e., they are stateful. While I find a lot of value in generally supporting this, I think using stateful attestations might be an extension to this spec than be a core part of it. We may need to keep this simple to allow for extensions. Happy to hear more thoughts on this.