Hi - > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The discussion thread starts with message > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg02547.html > The proposal was refined in message > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg02558.html > "My suggestion, instead, is an attempt to refine the private-use tag > system to include organizational namespaces so that organizations /that > would be using private tags anyway/ for whatever purposes they felt > legitimate--perhaps including but certainly not limited to other > linguistic features--can have an added guarantee that, when > intercommunicating with other organizations who agree with their tags, > their respective specialized parsing agents can definitively know that > the particular private tag they are looking at is, in fact, the one of > interest to them and not someone else's private tag that happens to > share the same letters. Exactly /what/ this would be used for is, as > you > have rightly noted, quite beyond the scope of this project and would > probably bore us all to death anyway (as if I'm not doing that > already)." > > After additional discussion, the proposal was withdrawn, see message > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg02570.html > > > Consequently, this item is marked "rejected". If further discussion of this issue is needed, please include the ticket number in your subject line. Randy, ltru co-chair _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.