Re: 6.16 Xref (was: Various draft problems)

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Sun Apr 29 2001 - 14:55:02 CDT


Brad Templeton <brad@templetons.com> writes:

> There were two different proposals for how to identify local headers, so
> they can be distinguished from others, with XRef grandfathered in but
> eventually changed.

> The first was to have them start with L-, however later I felt that the
> use of MIME syntax made more sense, since new headers should be defined
> in an extensible fashion anyway.

News software already knows how to handle Xref and wouldn't know how to
handle L-Xref. What purpose is served by doing this?

> Perhaps something like 'any header with a ;site="domain.name" tag on it
> is a local header, and should be either not fed downstream, or ignored
> and discarded by sites that do not match the domain'

News software already knows how to handle Xref and would break on the
inclusion of a ";site=domain.name" string in the Xref header, since that's
syntactically invalid for Xref. What purpose is served by doing this?

I an opposed to all proposals along these lines for the reasons stated on
this mailing list over the past two weeks. They're solutions in search of
a problem.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.