Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <andyparkins@gmail.com>) id 1RdISU-0006JB-Ja for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:27:34 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.53; envelope-from=andyparkins@gmail.com; helo=mail-ww0-f53.google.com; Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1RdISQ-0008Rq-QS for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:27:34 +0000 Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so12625699wgb.10 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 01:27:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.59.204 with SMTP id m12mr5481370wbh.10.1324459644603; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 01:27:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from dvr.localnet (mail.360visiontechnology.com. [92.42.121.178]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fw16sm5187016wbb.13.2011.12.21.01.27.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 21 Dec 2011 01:27:22 -0800 (PST) From: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net, Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:27:05 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/3.0.0-1-686-pae; KDE/4.6.3; i686; ; ) References: <CAAS2fgQpMWYLoT_1Za5AxvgNaXvEuJOZ2BjE94o09=t+LyfM5A@mail.gmail.com> <1324429140.3740.YahooMailNeo@web121001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1324429140.3740.YahooMailNeo@web121001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3076660.8H3a3Bu5hf"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201112210927.11979.andyparkins@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (andyparkins[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1RdISQ-0008Rq-QS Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP language on normative behavior X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:27:34 -0000 --nextPart3076660.8H3a3Bu5hf Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2011 December 21 Wednesday, Amir Taaki wrote: > In the original intention for BIP_0014, that would map to: >=20 > /Gecko:20110613/Firefox:6.0a2/Mozilla:5.0/ >=20 > With something like WebKit, it becomes easy to see why that would be > useful. You can suddenly do a network wide scan of all browsers using > WebKit, rather than having to maintain a database of all WebKit enabled > browsers. This seems excellent to me. I think most developers want to do the right thing when it comes to standar= ds,=20 and it is only the inflexibility or ambiguity of a standard that means they= =20 don't. This heirarchical method lets every client supply all the information they= =20 have -- nobody has to make a decision to leave something out. The internal= =20 debate they would have "is my gui version more important than my protocol=20 engine version?" is unnecessary. Andy =2D-=20 Dr Andy Parkins andyparkins@gmail.com --nextPart3076660.8H3a3Bu5hf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk7xpmoACgkQwQJ9gE9xL23WZgCfY7EULiptLS8rO4D1XEl4u7yj mOkAnjVyZJxcL7WrLONCL1Xkpfv4QITn =nXMW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3076660.8H3a3Bu5hf--