Re: hyphens in message names

[Erik Ostrom <eostrom@research.att.com>]

while i'm generally in sympathy with ken's desire to simplify parsing,
i have to ask about this, since it interacts with what i've been
proposing about protocol namespace:

>with the following possible dispatch paths.  (p) designates a protocol
>or subprotocol and (m) indicates a mesasge dispatch.

>root(p) -> mcp-negotiate-can(m) 
>root(p) -> mcp -> negotiate-can(m)
>root(p) -> mcp(p) -> negotiate(p) -> can(m)

what is a subprotocol?  is there a (root-)mcp protocol?  what does it
do?

if this is just a parsing strategy you're using, then fine, but if
it's meant to be something else, i think we need to hammer this out.

note that what i said in my last message was that "subprotocols" and
message namespaces were up to whoever owns the protocol; i suspect
this is in conflict with what ken is proposing.

--erik