Re: #1416 Injection-Date - Summary of options

["Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <874pm9ps8z.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>Okay, my proposed draft text now has:

>   ....  It SHOULD similarly reject any article
>        whose Date header field is too far in the past, since not all
>        news servers support Injection-Date and only the injecting agent
>        can provide a useful error message to the posting agent.  In
>        either case, this interval SHOULD NOT be any shorter than 72
>        hours into the past.


>The third sentence is the one that remains controversial.  I think we're
>fairly comfortable with the rest of the paragraph.

The wording is now much weaker than in the present draft. It is more of a
recommendation to "think of a number greater than 72 hours", which does
not preclude thinking of "infinity". So I still marginally do not like it,
but will not press the point if others are happy.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5