[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status

To: ietf-usefor@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 08:06:35 +0200
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-usefor/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-usefor.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-usefor-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Organization: <URL:http://purl.net/xyzzy>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
Sender: owner-ietf-usefor@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> I stand by "idiocy".

| Note:  THE USE OF DOMAIN-LITERALS IS STRONGLY DISCOURAGED.

Here's "Tough consensus", not only 10 years, STD 11 was 1982.

The 2822 syntax is (almost) perfect, but its semantics is
sometimes a bit vague.
                            Bye, Frank

References:
- #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
  - From: Charles Lindsey
- Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
  - From: Charles Lindsey
- Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand

Prev by Date: Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
Previous by thread: Re: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
Next by thread: #1047 Path field delimiters and syntax - status
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread