Ovid wrote:
--- Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And we are talking about the diagnostics part, which is primarily for
the user, so the rules are reversed there.
There are two goals we want:
1. Make it as human-readable as possible.
2. Maximize flexibility.
As for human-readable
On Apr 13, 2008, at 10:41, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Two possible solutions:
A) Just reserve ASCII [a-z]. This is very easy to check for but
I'm worried it's carving out too small a space.
Why would it be too small? I mean, that's a *lot* of words you can use.
B) Reserve "lower case" and
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:41:04 +0100
Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Two possible solutions:
>
> A) Just reserve ASCII [a-z]. This is very easy to check for but I'm
> worried it's carving out too small a space.
>
> B) Reserve "lower case" and leave the spec a little fuzzy around
David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Apr 13, 2008, at 10:41, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Two possible solutions:
A) Just reserve ASCII [a-z]. This is very easy to check for but I'm
worried it's carving out too small a space.
Why would it be too small? I mean, that's a *lot* of words you can use.
I d
On Apr 13, 2008, at 11:37, Michael G Schwern wrote:
A) Just reserve ASCII [a-z]. This is very easy to check for but
I'm worried it's carving out too small a space.
Why would it be too small? I mean, that's a *lot* of words you can
use.
I don't have any particular reason. Just a feeling t
On Sunday 13 April 2008 10:41:04 Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Remember, the producer and the displayer of the non-reserved keys are both
> under local user control. They choose the custom keys and they choose what
> they need and can handle.
That sort of eliminates the upgrading problem, doesn't i
chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 13 April 2008 10:41:04 Michael G Schwern wrote:
Remember, the producer and the displayer of the non-reserved keys are both
under local user control. They choose the custom keys and they choose what
they need and can handle.
That sort of eliminates the upgrading pro
On Sunday 13 April 2008 14:58:33 Michael G Schwern wrote:
> chromatic wrote:
> > On Sunday 13 April 2008 10:41:04 Michael G Schwern wrote:
> >> Remember, the producer and the displayer of the non-reserved keys are
> >> both under local user control. They choose the custom keys and they
> >> cho
* David E. Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-13 21:00]:
> On Apr 13, 2008, at 11:37, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> >>> A) Just reserve ASCII [a-z]. This is very easy to check
> >>> for but I'm worried it's carving out too small a space.
> >> Why would it be too small? I mean, that's a *lot* of word
--- Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with David on all counts.
>
> [a-z] seems perfectly sufficient to me, but saying âanything for
> which POSIX `islower` returns trueâ is acceptably precise.
I'll go along with this. Can we move forward now? :)
Cheers,
Ovid
--
Buy
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 03:58:58PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> and you'll end up with the protocol equivalent of spaghetti. Anyone care to
> guess how many X-* headers there are in all of the SMTP clients and servers
> in the wild? How about HTTP headers? Maybe you don't have to care about
$
11 matches
Mail list logo
