Mirja,I want to respond to this paragraph, since it squarely hits the heart of the matter:
On 06.07.2026 12:06, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote:
So the problem we would like to solve is to provide a clear definition for the today used practices. During previous discussion it has become clear that there are at least two well defined use cases for “updates”: one is the kind of OLD/NEW style document or similar (it doesn’t have to be OLD/NEW but something that clearly indicates that some text is changed);
It should be clear in the intro front *what* has changed, but not necessarily how (that could get lengthy). This to me is Updates.
the other one is the use for extension utilising existing extension points. Plus, as it also came up in this discussion, there are strong opinions that “updates” should or should not be used of the second case.
I mentioned SMTP as an example to Michael. How would you handle the forthcoming RFC that obsoletes 5321? Do the existing extensions extend? What happens when that list gets long? Is it still useful?
Eliot
OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
