>I can fully understand, that you prefer a more generic solution. However,
>the remarks: field idea is IMHO not a very good solution. Just read the
>mails in the abuse-c threads about abuse contact information in remark:
>fields of inet(6)num objects...
I agree, this is a very important aspect, and we should get it right
this time!!
>One advantage of my haiku object is, that its definition is - more or
>less - a copy of existing limerick object.
Again, a very important aspect: limit the impact on the large number
of scripts which have to parse these objects on a regular basis!
>The whois client as PIM application. I'm curious, what the database
>administration is going to say about that...
May I humbly suggest that the proponents of such an object come back
with a draft write-up (ripe document format preferred) by 31 of March
(maybe -0/+1 day :-)?
This would allow scheduling a discussion topic for the May meeting in
the DB-WG.
Cordially,
(your WG Chair)
_________________________________:_____________________________________
Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at
UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33
Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140
A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the street finds its own use for technology...
