I agree with the bit about "X-No-Archive" for sure. I'd prefer something
less than YAHCXS (yet another horribly complex XML schema) yet something
more than just a simple text description. However, I do think that's
more appropriate for an RFC discussion than discussion here. So count me
in for the RFC, I guess.
I really like the idea of a "get policy" command too. Most of the lists
I work with require a list charter that talks about such things which is
available as a simple HTML file that would be good for that.
thanks!
kt
-----Original Message-----
From: Barry A. Warsaw [mailto:bwarsaw@python.org]
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 3:42 PM
To: List Managers
Subject: Re: The gmane issue
>>>>> "CVR" == Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> writes:
>> D) Included as a header AND a machine-parseable line in the
>> body of the confirmation AND welcome message.
>> I pick #D.
CVR> There's already a defacto standard of X-No-Archive for "do
CVR> not archive this message".
CVR> How about creating another header:
CVR> X-No-Archive-List: (descriptive string).
CVR> If that exists, then the string either explains the policy or
CVR> points to a URL that explains the policy. If that exists, you
CVR> don't archive that list without following the policy.
CVR> Too simple?
I agree that a header is probably fine, but /please/ let's not make
the same mistake as with "X-No-Archive: yes" -- let's make a positive
assertion instead. Something like "X-Archive-Policy: (descriptive
string)".
I'm not sure what to put in there for "descriptive string". Some
wacky thoughts:
- A url pointing to an XML file for some hugely complicated syntax
that covers every possible policy decision under the sun. Start the
standards process now. <wink>.
- Some simple strings like "No-Mirrors", "Ask-First", "Free-For-All"
Also, what about standardizing an email command that can be used to
ask the listserver for its policy?
-Barry
|
|
