to specify normative language
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Ralph Droms
Sent: Mon 6/30/2008 10:11 AM
To: Spencer Dawkins
Cc: Randy Presuhn; IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
Would a reasonable BCP for future docs looks
* Whenever the keywords are used they are to be considered normative
* Whenever the keywords are used they SHOULD be capitalized
Ahem:
* Whenever the keywords are used they MUST be capitalized
* Editors SHOULD avoid use of normative keywords for non-normative
language, even in drafts.
Yes, I
: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
* Whenever the keywords are used they are to be considered normative
* Whenever the keywords are used they SHOULD be capitalized
Ahem:
* Whenever the keywords are used they MUST be capitalized
* Editors SHOULD avoid use of normative keywords for non
John Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Whenever the keywords are used they are to be considered normative
* Whenever the keywords are used they SHOULD be capitalized
Ahem:
* Whenever the keywords are used they MUST be capitalized
I did an exercise today: I looked at the first item on
.
--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Crocker
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 10:32 PM
To: Randy Presuhn
Cc: IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
Randy Presuhn
Discussion
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
Randy Presuhn wrote:
English is not case sensitive.
Not so. Case has long been used for emphasis in environments
lacking other typographical means, such as bolding, underlining,
or italicization.
Emphasis is not semantics.
Normative intent
To: Randy Presuhn
Cc: IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
Randy Presuhn wrote:
English is not case sensitive.
Not so. Case has long been used for emphasis in environments
lacking other typographical means, such as bolding, underlining,
or italicization.
Emphasis
Ralph Droms wrote:
Would a reasonable BCP for future docs looks something like:
terms defined in RFC 2119 are to be capitalized for clarity;
alternatives for RFC 2119 terms, such as ought and can are to be
used in
non-normative text to avoid confusion
+1
Thanks.
d/
--
Dave
Hi -
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: C. M. Heard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: IETF Discussion ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
...
Are you saying that according to RFC 2119 SHOULD means something
different than
Randy Presuhn wrote:
In what universe does that make sense?
...
One in which when the photocopier's paper jam light goes, the operator SHOULD
open the cover and remove any crumpled pieces of paper, which should resolve
the problem.
These are very distinct senses of the word
Wow. I was
Randy Presuhn wrote:
In what universe does that make sense?
...
One in which when the photocopier's paper jam light goes, the operator SHOULD
open the cover and remove any crumpled pieces of paper, which should resolve
the problem.
These are very distinct senses of the word
Wow. I was
Hi -
From: Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: IETF Discussion ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
...
English is not case sensitive.
Not so. Case has long been used for emphasis in environments
lacking other typographical means
Dave,
regardless of the original intent of 2119, your belief is inconsistent
with longstanding IETF process. you do not get to retroactively change
the intent of RFCs that have gained consensus and approval.
Keith
Dave Crocker wrote:
Randy Presuhn wrote:
In what universe does that
Randy Presuhn wrote:
English is not case sensitive.
Not so. Case has long been used for emphasis in environments
lacking other typographical means, such as bolding, underlining,
or italicization.
Emphasis is not semantics.
Normative intent is semantic.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
On 28 jun 2008, at 3:54, C. M. Heard wrote:
The common usage in the IETF is to capitalize the words when used
with the meanings in Sections 1-5 of RFC 2119 and to use then in
lower case when ordinary English usage is meant.
Are you saying that according to RFC 2119 SHOULD means something
Dave,
See inline below...
--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson
-Original Message-
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 12:04 PM
To: Eric Gray
Cc: IETF Discussion
Subject: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
Importance: High
Dave Crocker wrote:
Eric Gray wrote:
(By the way, I hope folks are clear that IETF use of these words as
normative
does not depend upon the case that is used?)
This is NOT true. These terms are explicitly defined in all capital
letters
to make it possible to distinguish when they are
Computer science long ago made the mistake of imposing semantic
difference on
case differences, which is distinct from other uses of case. Absent
explicit
specification of case sensitivity for the keywords, the rules of
English writing
apply, I would think.
For better or worse, in IETF we
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008, Dave Crocker wrote:
Eric Gray wrote:
(By the way, I hope folks are clear that IETF use of these words as
normative
does not depend upon the case that is used?)
This is NOT true. These terms are explicitly defined in all capital letters
to make it possible to
19 matches
Mail list logo
