Bruce Lilly scripsit:
I see no reason why limits must be added as a
constraint in a revision of RFC 3066.
The primary reason for specifying limits is due to the
proposed removal of the review/registration process
which currently limits the length of non-private-use
tags.
The current process does *not* limit the length of non-private-use
tags. It's true that the process does not permit the registration of
unlimited-length tags, as we do not have enough universe to represent them in
full.
But absolutely nothing except his good sense prevents Michael from registering
en-the-dialect-spoken-on-the-bowery-between-1933-and-1945-by-alcoholic-drug-users-who-live-in-flophouses.
--
John Cowan jcowan(_at_)reutershealth(_dot_)com www.reutershealth.com
www.ccil.org/~cowan
"It's the old, old story. Droid meets droid. Droid becomes chameleon.
Droid loses chameleon, chameleon becomes blob, droid gets blob back
again. It's a classic tale." --Kryten, Red Dwarf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf