On 6/2/25 03:43, [email protected] wrote:
Hi,


[PK] I'm not happy with "technical solution cannot otherwise be defined" as 
this is a condition likely impossible to fulfil or proof, as there will be always some 
solution possible. This also does not express the prime motivation for bare identifiers 
use:

If you have some other words, please propose them.


- when identifier is generic and is a building block of RDAP protocol itself, 
backed with an IETF RFC -> analogy to standards tree media type registration

This seems to be defining some new class of building block extensions that do 
not exist.

- when the extension is only adding a single JSON property

Why just JSON as they could also apply to paths, query parameters and object 
class names? And why is JSON the exception when the negative implementation 
feedback is specific to JSON?

-andy

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to