In <200109212157(_dot_)RAA18853(_at_)astro(_dot_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith
Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
Sure, you don't register a header unless there is paper somewhere that
describes the proper way to use it. That could always include an internet
draft in the case of a provisional registration.
We need more than documentation to use headers widely, we need good design.
And experience suggests that fields designed by individual implementors
aren't suitable for widespread use.
Indeed so, which is why a mechanism that forces at least an internet draft
(which automatically provides a forum for discussion) and that causes the
registration to lapse if the draft is not pursued to RFC status would
provide some degree of control.
Contrast that with the present situation where headers just appear, get
implemented in lots of places, and it is then too late to change them. A
good example is the Netnews Mail-Copies-To header. I am not sure where it
came from, but it is now widely recognised and acted upon. So much so that
we have included it in the Usefor Draft, even though it is badly named and
comes with two sets of keywords to do the same thing (though we have now
deprecated one of those).
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5
Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5