- From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 08:33:52 -0800
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200 ------- Additional Comments From julian.reschke@greenbytes.de 2005-12-10 08:33 ------- I'm not sure with whom I'm disagreeing here, but anyway..: Should there be use case where a client needs to discover upfront whether the server claims to comply with -bis, I'd agree. Please provide this use case. Furthermore, *if* we keep the new compliance class, it should definitively use a different name, such as "rev2" or "rfcxxxx" (where xxxx is the RFC number we'll get). ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Saturday, 10 December 2005 16:34:14 UTC