On 2/8/02 at 11:27 AM +0000, Charles Lindsey wrote:
If 3 or 4 sites want to use Counter-Argument-To amongst thjemselves for a
very special purpose, then it should be X-Counter-Argument-To.
If 3 or 4 sites say "let us try this out strictly between ourselves", then
it should be X-Counter-Argument-To.
But if they say "this seems a neat idea; let us try it out to see if it
works and if it does then maybe it will catch on worldwide", than they have
"anticipated" a wide deployment, and they should use Counter-Argument-To,
having first got it into our proposed register (which implies passing our
modest hurdles, of course).
And if 3 or 4 sites want to use Counter-Argument-To amongst
themselves for a very special purpose and make it
X-Counter-Argument-To, and then it does catch on worldwide because
slowly 500 sites and 10 MUA writers all implement it, we are again
stuck with a non-standardizable field name because they decided to
start it with an X. What is the HARM of not just calling it
Counter-Argument-To from the get-go?????
pr
--
Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com>
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102