[db-wg] Re: abuse-c: proposal

> Attribute name
> 	Name should be distinctive, eg: 'abuse-mailbox'; not 'e-mail'

since it should be a handle, which allows me to even get to
a <gasp!> phone number, calling it mail-anything seems a
mis-direction.  since all the rest are of the form <foo>-c:,
do we have to invent something new?

> Handle
> 	Handle is upwardly scalable
> 	Handle could refer to person, role, or maintainer

yep

> Value
> 	Value is necessary; if not in primary object, then indirectly
> 	Value in primary object is attractive at low end of scale
> 	Value is vulnerable to RHS-hijacking, even if not in primary object!

do not understand.  do you mean the value (right hand side)
of the abuse-c: attribute?  or are we sending cash? :-)

at this point, either i am not understanding something(s) or
your discussion gets very complex.  i am old and stupider
every day, so much inclined to very simple things.  e.g.,

  o add abuse-c: which points to the nic-handle: of a person
    or role

  o separate, but worthwhile, discussion about enhancing
    person and role objects per ulrich.

randy