On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:13:22PM +0100, Stephen Farrell allegedly wrote:
Folks,
We just had another pretty good jabber chat (IMO anyway). The
Sorry I couldn't make it but I read the log.
WRT versioning, can I suggest that the rule for incrementing V= is
when backward compatability is broken or when the new functionality
defaults to MUST semantics that are not defined in an earlier draft.
On a side note, I've often thought that pre-standard implementations
should identify who they are and what spec they are based on - merely
for diagnostic purposes.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html