On 7/11/19 5:26 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
While we've got agreement among the cohort that BCP 190 conformance would be onerous and it does not bring any advantages to us...
As advice to people planning to engage in this conversation, I would like to point out that the purpose of BCP 190 has never been to provide advantages to protocol designers. That is, in fact, the opposite of its purpose.
The purpose of BCP 190 is to provide protections to the URI namespace and the people who own its governance (e.g., domain owners) *against* protocol designers. You will have far more success communicating with those people who think the current text in BCP 190 is correct if you keep this in mind, and frame your arguments accordingly.
/a _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
