On Oct 27, 2009, William Herrin wrote: > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/wiki/RRGTerminology > > I thought they were crap and I wasn't alone. [...]
Then perhaps we should revise the definitions. We are talking about terminology that will be fundamental for writing the RRG recommendation, so a wide acceptance of its definition is clearly desirable. Personally, I believe that the present definition could be simplified. After all, the only thing that matters is the distinction between names with and without topological significance. - Christian _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
