On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:13:22PM +0100, Stephen Farrell allegedly wrote: > > Folks, > > We just had another pretty good jabber chat (IMO anyway). The
Sorry I couldn't make it but I read the log. WRT versioning, can I suggest that the rule for incrementing V= is when backward compatability is broken or when the new functionality defaults to MUST semantics that are not defined in an earlier draft. On a side note, I've often thought that pre-standard implementations should identify who they are and what spec they are based on - merely for diagnostic purposes. Mark. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
