From: Andrew Gierth (email@example.com)
Date: Sun May 05 2002 - 07:08:29 CDT
>>>>> "Charles" == Charles Lindsey <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Charles> So please, EVERYBODY, READ IT CAREFULLY, for two purposes:
Charles> 1. To decide whether anything else needs doing before
Charles> submitting it to the IESG.
1. It is still too long (two or three times longer than should be
2. It still attempts to introduce changes which are unnecessarily
incompatible with existing implementations (for example, the
introduction of purely cosmetic whitespace and folding, comments, or
parameters, into important machine-parsed headers)
3. It still confuses technical issues with aesthetic and policy ones.
For example, the use of "MUST NOT" in connection with auto-creation of
groups from traffic is not justifiable on interoperability grounds.
Likewise for much of the section on newsgroup-names.
Charles> 2. To fix any final nitpicks (I am sure there will be some,
Charles> and I will probably find quite a few myself, but I really
Charles> hope they will be minor by now).
there are lots, and they are still major.
Charles> I want this to be an INTERNAL LAST CALL within this Working
Charles> Group. And I hope that no member of this group will raise
Charles> any objection at final Last Call to the IESG unless he has
Charles> raised his problem here first.
I have raised my objections many times here in the past.
You may take it as given that I will object (especially on the grounds
of incompatibility with established practice) to any attempt to move
this document forward in its current form.