Preferences vary. I like the idea of a jargon series RFCs. Steve
Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 13, 2025, at 5:39 PM, Edward Lewis <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 13, 2025, at 12:00, Steve Crocker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> If necessary, an Informational RFC explaining the history of the term could >> be written. For those who are writing standards track RFCs in the future >> and feel it is necessary to acknowledge the term "white lie" they can then >> refer to the Informational RFC. Readers focused on what they need to know >> in order to understand how negative spans work can ignore the distraction. > > Preserving the history of the term is a good idea, or any term whose meaning > comes with a story. Instead of a standalone document, could it be a section > in another, like compact-denial-of-existence? If we had a separate document > for every piece of jargon we’ve misused, we’d have, well, a lot more RFCs. ;) >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
