Re: New 2822upd-04 - obs-NO-WS-CTL

Thanks Nick. Those goals are still worth following, even after this many 
years, and it's worth being reminded of them.

	Tony Hansen
	[email protected]

Nick Shelness wrote:
> Frank,
> 
> You wrote on 01/18/2008 12:59:47:
> 
>> ...
>> For a DS it has to be implemented and needs to be interoperable in
>> some way, and "breaks in NetNews" would be suspicious, UAs for mail
>> and news likely support only one approach where possible.
>> ...
> 
> I realize that the drums effort began so long ago that it is easy to 
> forget its objective.
> 
> To paraphrase, it was not to CHANGE existing Full Standards (822, 1123, 
> etc) and other RFCs that it was expected would reach Full Standard status 
> (even though they haven't yet), but to produce a small set of documents 
> that superseded, and where necessary (and where possible) clarified, them 
> all. The working group reached early consensus that it could not outlaw 
> constructs collectively allowed by these earlier standards even though the 
> group would deprecate their use. Pete's (if memory serves me correctly, it 
> was his invention) obs- non-obs approach was then accepted as the best 
> vehicle to achieve this. So the only remaining issue viz the obs- syntax 
> is simply whether it accurately captures the syntax explicitly allowed by 
> these earlier standards and not whether these obs- constructs are good, 
> bad or indifferent.
> 
> Nick
>