On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote: > I'd be in favour of something like, "The use of different sniffing > algorithms in different implementations creates [these sorts of > problems]. Because of that, settling on common sniffing mechanisms is > important. To that end, implementations that sniff SHOULD > [...etc...]." The explanation of why it's important may sway some > implementors, and making it a SHOULD recognizes that some will go > their own way in any case. This sounds reasonable to me. AdamReceived on Wednesday, 1 April 2009 01:36:08 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:37 GMT