> This is where #3 is a non-starter for me: it requires us to > change all of the matching schemes in ways that are > incompatible with our previous tenets. We already have to. There's no way you can compare cmn with zh-HK or vice versa (if you want to) without modifying the doc. > I didn't have to change the matching code because I > canonicalize tags and ranges before matching. With a deprecation, > the registry provides all of the information for this using > the same mechanism I already use for mapping The registry could provide similar equivalence for you, without deprecation, since you find the registry useful. > "Better" may not be the right word. "Preferred" would better > describe the situation. Either form may be better for *your* > application (or mine), depending on circumstances. That's not the definition of Deprecate: From OED & Webster online: Deprecate dep-re-cate: 1. trans. To pray against (evil); to pray for deliverance from; to seek to avert by prayer. arch. 3. trans. To plead earnestly against; to express an earnest wish against (a proceeding); to express earnest disapproval of (a course, plan, purpose, etc.). And: 1 a: archaic : to pray against (as an evil) b: to seek to avert <deprecate the wrath...of the Roman people - Tobias Smollett> 2: to express disapproval of 3 a: play down : make little of <speaks five languages...but deprecates this facility - Time> b: belittle, disparage <the most reluctantly admired and least easily deprecated of...novelists - New Yorker> So I have a hard time reading "deprecated" as being "allowed" to use either form, it seems that people would "pray" that I wouldn't use the deprecated form and "belittle" the implementation if a deprecated form was used :) - Shawn _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.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.