- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:30:06 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote: > Hmm. That section would merely be a verbatim repeat of the registry, > since by definition there isn't any more information to add. That may be true for "up", but doesn't seem to be the case for "payment", for instance. > How about adding a note to each of them to indicate it's grandfathered > in? E.g., > > Notes: this relation pre-exists this specification, and did not > indicate a reference. > ... That is a true statement, but by removing the old registry the information that *is* present over there will be lost -- so I think it should be preserved *somewhere*. BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 23 July 2009 07:30:49 UTC