RE: lastVerified: optional vs. extension

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

> Here's my metric:
> 
> Make it optional if
> 1) Everyone that will want to use it will do so in the same way and 
> can agree on the syntax.
> 2) Everyone will want to be able to make use of it at some point - 
> even if not regularly.
> 3) It's worth making a change to the core documents for this.

I don't think syntax is a problem, but based on the discussion so far I
don't think we've met the "Everyone that will want to use it will do so in
the same way" or "Everyone will want to be able to make use of it at some
point" metrics.

> Make it an extension if
> 1) Not everyone agrees on what is should look like or how it 
> should be used.
> 2) Not everyone will want the ability to make use of it.
> Note that there is no #3 (would have been - it can be an extension 
> after the core specs are at PS).  I won't say this because I refuse 
> to consider extensions to a protocol that hasn't hit PS yet.

Both of these loom large based on the discussion so far.

-Scott-