Re: Proposed changes for <chkscope>

Russ Allbery skrev:
> I think I received no feedback for this proposed diff other than
> agreement from Julien.  Given that we're in AUTH48, in the absence of
> more consensus on the list that this is worth pushing at this phase, I'm
> not going to try to ask the RFC Editor to include it.
>
> So if you want me to push for this change, please speak up now.
>   
I'd like to see this change.
> Index: usepro.xml
> ===================================================================
> --- usepro.xml  (revision 5949)
> +++ usepro.xml  (working copy)
> @@ -2022,14 +2022,24 @@
>            the valid groups in all hierarchies or sub-hierarchies with a
>            prefix listed in the <chkscope> argument, excluding any
>            sub-hierarchy where the <chkscope> argument is prefixed by
> -          "!".  If no <chkscope> argument is given, it applies to all
> +          "!".  For complex cases with multiple <chkscope> arguments,
> +          start from an empty list of groups, include all groups in the
> +          checkgroups control message matching <chkscope> arguments
> +          without a "!" prefix, and then exclude all groups matching
> +          <chkscope> arguments with a "!" prefix.  Follow this method
> +          regardless of the order of the <chkscope> arguments in the
> +          Control header field.</t>
> +
> +          <t>If no &lt;chkscope> argument is given, it applies to all
>            hierarchies for which group statements appear in the body of the
> -          message.  Since much existing software does not honor the
> -          &lt;chkscope> argument, the body of the checkgroups control
> -          message MUST NOT contain group statements for newsgroups outside
> -          the intended scope and SHOULD contain a correct newsgroup list
> -          even for sub-hierarchies excluded with "!" &lt;chkscope> terms.
> -          News servers, however, MUST honor &lt;chkscope> as specified
> +          message.</t>
> +
> +          <t>Since much existing software does not honor the &lt;chkscope>
> +          argument, the body of the checkgroups control message MUST NOT
> +          contain group statements for newsgroups outside the intended
> +          scope and SHOULD contain a correct newsgroup list even for
> +          sub-hierarchies excluded with "!" &lt;chkscope> terms.  News
> +          servers, however, MUST honor &lt;chkscope> as specified
>            here.</t>
>  
>            <t>The &lt;chksernr> argument may be any positive integer.  If
>
>