From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Sat Mar 20 2004 - 13:26:42 CST
Henry Spencer wrote:
> There is nothing in the registry proposal which would empower it to refuse
> to accept a second definition of Subject just because it already has one.
Of course neither the registry nor its defining document has any power.
But the document provides for procedures, specifically a review process
and IESG oversight, and it is unlikely that an incompatible definition
of Subject or any other RFC 2822 field would be approved for permanent
registration without some extraordinary justification. To date there
has not been even any mediocre justification for imposing structure on
the Subject field.