-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com]
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:29 AM
At 04:36 PM 2/21/2002 +0000, Graham Klyne wrote:
The main change is a refactoring into a permanent registry and a
provisional repository.
The split into two categories seems like an especially
helpful change, given the concerns that have been expressed.
I'm afraid I don't see how two registries accomplishes this any better
than a single registry with a status field on each entry that expresses
this distinction. To me, a single registry has several advantages:
(1) There's only one place to look to see header fields.
(2) When a temporary/proprietary field moves to standardized, the
maintainers of the registry need only change a status field rather than
move the entry between registries.
Admittedly neither of these is a big deal, but they are IMHO advantages
to a single registry over a split registry and I see no advantages the
other way around; maybe someone can enlighten me.
So, separate from the fine-grained details, I would like to
propose that the split be between Standardized vs. Proprietary.
While many (perhaps most) of the entries in the non-standardized
category will indeed be purely proprietary, to me "proprietary" means
implemented by only a single MUA. It seems to me that there will also
be a significant number of non-standardized fields that are more widely
implemented and thus aren't strictly proprietary in my sense of that
word. I think that Standardized/Non-Standard is perhaps a better
distinction than Standardized/Proprietary.
-- jeff