At 14:10 -0400 6/2/11, Scott Rose wrote:
Then perhaps a wording change? It seems that it is confusion over the language rather than the purpose.
A wording change is probably needed, but I can't suggest one because I can't determine what the goal is from what's currently written. I know that sounds like a cheap shot, but I'm definitely not getting something here.
E.g., I'm assuming the document is suggesting that the IANA registry have the new column and that is my main complaint. (That it shouldn't.) If the matrix with the compliance column only appears in the document, while the IANA registry omits the column, I have no complaint. Perhaps IANA lists the document as a reference at the end of the matrix, but the registry contents itself doesn't hold "recommendations."
Does that make sense? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 Now, don't say I'm always complaining. Wait, that's a complaint, isn't it? _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf