Re: Is this a STraw Poll?

[Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov-usefor@xxxxxxxxx>]

Charles Lindsey wrote:

> In <87wtvbsh4c.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>  
>
> > Charles Lindsey <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >    
> >
> > > Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov-usefor@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > >      
> > >
> > > > This WG has enough work to do already, so I am Ok with defining
> > > > complaints-url in a separate document. However the syntax for
> > > > Injection-Info (or whatever we end up using) should allow for multiple
> > > > URLs.
> > > >        
> > > OK, so it seems that a mail-complaints-to parameter in Injection-Info is
> > > the front runner. So we would need, in USEFOR:
> > >      
> > >
> > >   inj-info-param  =  post-host-param /
> > >                      post-account-param /
> > >                      sender-param /
> > >                      logging-param /
> > >                      mail-complaints-param
> > >      
> > >
> > >   mail-complaints-param = "mail-complaints-to" "=" address-list
> > >      
> > That looks like it's allowing multiple addresses, not multiple URLs.
> >    
>
> Yes, that was the intention. The proposal, as already discussed, was to
> have separate parameters for the pure email case (mail-complaints-to=) and
> for the url case (complaints-url= or somesuch). Our chair proposed (see
> above) leaving complaints-url to a future extension, and that gave me the
> opportunity to write up the mail-complaints-to properly.
>  
My question is: do we *want* to allow for multiple complaints-to email 
addresses?