Re: [apps-discuss] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-appsawg-text-markdown-use-cases-02: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

On 11/07/2015 05:45, Sean Leonard wrote:
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Benoit Claise <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-appsawg-text-markdown-use-cases-02: Discuss
>>
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>>
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-text-markdown-use-cases/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> DISCUSS:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Easy to fix DISCUSS: The RFC 2119 boilerplate is missing:
>>
>>        The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
>> NOT",
>>        "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in
>> this
>>        document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> - I was surprised by the RFC2119 keywords in a use cases document (which
>> I first thought of as an applicability document")
>> But, actually, according to the abstract, it's way more than a use cases
>> document: "Background information, local storage strategies, and
>> additional syntax registrations are supplied.",
>> It's really the companion document of draft-ietf-appsawg-text-markdown.
>> Maybe the title is wrong, and should be something such as text/markdown
>> strategies and registrations?
>
> So to conclude here: the use-cases document needs RFC 2119 boilerplate and reference. Right?
Right.
And I understand, from some other email thread, that you plan on 
changing the document title. This is the right thing to do.

Regards, Benoit