From: Pawel Kowalik <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 11:59 AM
To: Andrew Newton (andy) <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: I-D Action:
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions-05.txt
Hi Andy,
On 12.02.25 17:06, Andrew Newton (andy) wrote:
Allowing bare identifiers still leave the choice open for extensions
which have a potential of generic use.
Why does requiring a prefix preclude generic use?
Of course technically nothing, because syntactically a prefixed identifier
is also an identifier.
On the other side, if an extension only wants to add one single path segment
/search/ what's good about forcing this extension to make it /s_search/ just
for the sake of making "s_" a namespace with one single suffix in it?
[SAH] Because there’s value in consistency.
Scott
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
