[acm-tf] suggestion

Hi,

> Renaming the attribute is a semantic change and does not in any way
> change any existing behaviour. But the impact of a simple name change
> could be huge. Now it is a weird maintainer attribute name that does not
> even point to a maintainer object. Add to that the out of date
> documentation about the IRT object and nothing gives anyone confidence
> that this is the place to document an abuse contact. This name change,
> coupled with up to date documentation, makes it intuitive:
> 
> Where do I document my abuse contact information?
> I see there is an "abuse-c:" attribute.
> It points to an object with an "abuse-mailbox:" attribute.
> That must be the place.
> 
> It leads you to the right place.
> 
> But this change does not address some of the other concerns raised by
> the Task Force yesterday about use of hierarchies and mandatory/required
> issues. That is something the Task Force still needs to discuss and may
> need a policy to implement any outcomes of those discussions.

I could not more agree to this. Again, I think this is a great idea.

Thanks,

Tobias

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 267 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/acm-tf/attachments/20110503/9ed89010/attachment.sig>