ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Message Header Field Registry - revised proposal

2002-02-27 05:12:22

In <p05100311b8a176d380bd(_at_)[130(_dot_)237(_dot_)150(_dot_)141]> Jacob Palme 
<jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> writes:


At 10.00 -0800 02-02-21, Jeff Stephenson wrote:
(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.

Also, two separate registries introduces the risk of the
same header name occuring by mistake in both registries.

I don't think that is a serious risk.

Clearly, it is no big deal whether we have one registry with provisional
tags, or two seperate ones.

My personal preference is for two, and that has the advantage of keeping
the URN space cleaner (not that I really understand this URN business).

-- 
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>