From: John Stanley (stanley@peak.org)
Date: Mon Dec 30 2002 - 15:21:30 CST
Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk):
>The only reason that we are considering this now, long after last call, is
>that we have come up with a bug in the existing draft.
You can justify any change to the draft at this point by claiming that
what you want to change is a "bug" and you are just "fixing a bug".
I do not happen to agree that non-case-specificity in the keyword "poster"
is a bug. It is a perfectly good way of doing things. It is the way that
everyone on this list thought it ought to be done, until long after last
call and you decided it had to be changed. Every person on this list read
that section of the draft and thought it was acceptable.
Just what the hell was the reason I was told I couldn't discuss something
after last call if the same limitation doesn't exist for anyone else
here?
>If there
>were some great benefit in breaking existing software ...
If "existing software" makes poor assumptions about things, then it is
broken and needs to be fixed. We are not breaking the software, the author
who assumed that there might be a newsgroup named "Poster" or "pOsTeR" is
the one who made the mistake, and they should be required to fix it.