Re: Fw: requested tweak to 2822upd grammar - consensus call
Pete Resnick <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <p06250104c501bca0676a@[75.145.176.242]> |
On 9/9/08 at 8:20 PM -0700, [email protected] wrote: >Dave Crocker wrote: >>Tony Hansen wrote: >>>Doing a few searches show that some names that don't cause >>>conflicts are msg-id-internal, msg-id-kernel and msg-id-element. I >>>think the choice should be between Pete and Lisa. >> >>Not that you asked for additional input, but to offer a personal >>comment on the linguistic choices: While "internal" is >>structurally correct, it doesn't say much about completeness or >>utility. And "element" actually implies incompleteness. >> >>Of the 3 choices, "kernel" nicely implies completeness and utility. > >FWIW, I like "kernel" as well. I also have no problem with this >change being made. So, after Charles's message, I'm no longer clear why the original (msg-id-core), which already appears in the usefor document, shouldn't be used. Mind you, I'm myself not entirely clear why we want to do this at all, but I've got no particular objection to it. pr -- Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/> Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102