Doug Ewell wrote: >> there's never a danger of A -> B -> C -> A, if A *_must_* >> point to something that has no further pointer. > I think we are again trying to legislate against the > unthinkable. [...] > There is no reasonable chance that ietf-languages will ever > make an older (sub)tag the Preferred-Value for a newer one. Not intentionally, but with a valid A -> B and a new subtag C deprecating B you get A -> B -> C, and a simple typo could twist this into A -> B -> A. Admittedly I like graph theory. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at 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.