So ... it seems to me that based on Sam's note, and John's previous note, a
short statement at the beginning of the document that says approximately
what Sam said would be very helpful. I'm not looking to challenge every
SHOULD, especially in a BCP.
It would be helpful to say "this is our best guidance. There may be
considerations that lead you to use other approaches (for example, building
on existing work that uses other escapes), but consider the shortcomings of
those approaches in making this decision".
Or something like that.
I definitely think it is important that when using a URI or IRI in
another protocol to be able to follow the conventions of the URI or
IRI. Similarly, even if we find a convention that we don't like I
think it is valuable to be able to build on existing work rather than
introduce confusion.
Thanks,
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf