Re: Updating 2.4, rewritten

This is a good proposal.

If it isn't there already, we need an entry in the glossary to clarify
that "automatic refresh" is not confined to the non-standard but
ubiquitous HTTP-equiv refresh
header.

If no one objects to Adam's latest proposal before or during the next
teleconference, I propose that it be adopted for purposes of the next
draft (with status "new").