Should we add a section to the terminology doc? -- Bob Harold
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 6:56 PM Steve Crocker <[email protected]> wrote: > 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] >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
