Re: [regrep] Issues for F2F re RegistryEntry class

[Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>]

Len

While I generally support your proposals, and strongly support the addition
of the urn attribute, I must object to the proposal to introduce CodeText
using the restricted ISO 646 IRV character set. Whilst I have no objections
to restricting the length of long names to, say 32 characters, I do not
think that forcing them to the Latin alphabet is a good idea, and even less
is the idea to forbid the use of accented characters. You state that "This
attribute can be thought of as a pointer to a speciic node of that
classification scheme". If it was defined as a ClassificationNode instance
it would not be restricted to the IRV character set. So why add this
additional constraint, which will antogonize European and other non-US RAs?

Martin Bryan