Please remember this line of argument and experience when the
IESG issues the promised document promoting 2606 to a firm
requirement. :-(
FWIW, I completely agree. Further fwiw, I tried, long before I
got upset at the blocking DISCUSS, to edit the example changes
into the working copy of 2821bis, trying to preserve the
diversity of the 821/2821 example domains in the process. I
didn't run out of domains (having not tried the "append
'.example' to everything trick, partially on the theory that it
would add, rather than reduce, confusion). I spent hours, not
days, on it, but... Tony and I have now discovered several
domains that I missed, at least one place where the example was
changed but text referring to it was not, etc. Maybe I would
have gotten it right if I spent more time on it. Probably we
could get it right if a lot of people looked at it. But the
notion that one can just go in and quickly change the examples
in a document this large is, from my experience (and apparently
yours), just a fantasy.
I do believe that I have all of the places identified now so
that, if people wanted option (2), we could get it right with
one more pass by me and a review/recheck by others, so I don't
intend this note to influence the outcome of the poll. But, in
the general case, I think it would be a bad mistake for the IESG
to insist on changing examples to 2606 form in revised large and
complex documents, just because of the risk of introducing new
errors.
john
--On Tuesday, 08 July, 2008 10:53 +0200 Arnt Gulbrandsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I prefer (1) as such changes may entail more than simply
>> adding .example at the end of the domain names.
>
> A little off-topic, but I feel like ranting.
>
> IMO, adding .example to all the domains would be entirely
> insufficient. Both people and software are good at recognizing
> the common TLDs, and turning something like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> into [EMAIL PROTECTED] doesn't change everyone's
> perception. Too many people will pick up the "TLD" .com while
> skimming or reading, too many scrapers will ignore .example.
>
> If an example is to be changed and still keep its value to the
> reader, then it has to be edited with care. A global search
> and replace isn't care.
>
> And an on-topic remark: I tried to edit the examples in either
> 2821 or 2822 into 2606ese a couple of years ago, but gave up.
> 2606 didn't provide enough domains for me to do the job well.
> Maybe a better editor could do it. Or maybe not. Jon Postel
> chose to use more domains than 2606 provides, and IMNSHO Jon
> Postel was good enough at writing RFCs.
>
> Arnt
>
