Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: W3C tag policy disclaimers and IETF RFCs

From: "L.Gillam" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 18:02:56 +0100

> No intent to oppose. I just add the "0-" sequence.

Jefsey,

Do you mean that you will create an RFC that takes in whatever is in the current draft and expands it with 0- to provide whatever it is that you want, such that the following would be allowed:

en-US-0-jefsey.wants.this.to.be.possible?
en-US-x-private-0-jefsey.wants.this.to.be.possible?
0-jefsey.wants.this.to.be.possible?

?

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: r&d afrac <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 23:30:13 +0200

At 19:02 08/08/2005, L.Gillam wrote:
>Do you mean that you will create an RFC that takes in whatever is in the 
>current draft and expands it with 0- to provide whatever it is that you 
>want, such that the following would be allowed:

Dear Lee,
The result is certainly in the form you say. But it cannot be documented in 
any other RFC if not permitted by this Draft. It needs the paragraph I 
introduced.

>0-jefsey.wants.this.to.be.possible?

Yes. Or respecting the K/H RFC: en-0-sheme.sub-scheme:subname.name. I then 
have two possibilities: either to propose the IESG to review the K/H RFC 
before it is published, to have a unique RFC or to introduce a generalised 
multilngual tagging system where the K/H RFC "tags:" scheme would be 
replaced by the "0-" sequence.

All this is compatible with the Draft ABNF since it is made to stop at "0-".
jfc