Re: [Asrg] 6. Propsals -- Labeling recommendations for the FTC

["Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com>]

Brett Watson <famous-asrg@nutters.org>:
> Not that I've seen the "keywords" field used in practice, or used it myself 
> outside of obscure humour value in Usenet posts many years ago. But hey -- 
> devil's advocate.

A fair point to raise.  But I did consider it...and concluded that
Keywords is generally unused precisely *because* there are no global
conventions about ketyword meanings.
 
> I see two possible ways around this. One is to define a specific new
> field; the other is to make the keywords a bit more
> specific. Obviously Eric was attempting to avoid defining new
> fields, and that's a fair tack, but defining a new field is an
> option. To make the keywords more specific, we could have
> "can-spam-advertising" instead of just "advertising" (using
> "can-spam-" as a namespace of sorts), to reduce the plausibility
> that it will conflict with any existing usage.

I considered this, too -- in my first draft, it was "Content-keyword".
Since Keywords is both registered and unused, going with it seemed
liike the better approach.  But I'm not strongly attached to this; my
mind could be changed.

> On the matter of internationalisation, I would say that these are meant 
> primarily to be machine-readable tokens. The MUA can translate the tokens 
> into an appropriate natural language description or icon, etc.

That was my thinking, too; I should have mentioned it in the rationale.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg