Re: [apps-discuss] Use of RFC 2119, Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-about-uri-scheme-03.txt

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

I said...
>> I'm sure.  And it's my text -- this is one that Mykyta doesn't like.
>> The three MUSTs in there are not directed at IANA, but at people
>> writing new registrations.  They tell those people what their
>> registrations have to look like, and I wanted to use MUST to stress
>> that even though this is an FCFS policy, there are requirements
>> nonetheless.

Julian says...
> I'm with Murray here. This is something RFC 2119 keywords are not for.

OK... and given the conversations that Pete and I have had recently
(we're both in favour of less unnecessary all-caps 2119 stuff), I
think a change is appropriate.  Let's lower-case (or remove) those
three "MUST"s (and there are three others that are already in lower
case, which is fine).

Section 4.2:
OLD
   The registry entries consist of 3 fields: Special-Purpose Token,
   Description and Reference.  The Special-Purpose Token field MUST
   conform to <about-token> production defined in Section 2.1.
NEW
   The registry entries consist of 3 fields: Special-Purpose Token,
   Description and Reference.  The Special-Purpose Token field
   conforms to the <about-token> production defined in Section 2.1.

OLD
   The registration procedures for this registry are "First Come First
   Served", described in RFC 5226 [RFC5226], with supporting
   documentation meeting the requirements below.  The registrant of the
   token MUST provide the following registration template, which will be
   made available on IANA web site:
NEW
   The registration procedures for this registry are "First Come First
   Served", described in RFC 5226 [RFC5226], with supporting
   documentation meeting the requirements below.  The registrant of the
   token must provide the following registration template, which will be
   made available on IANA web site:

OLD
   o Specification.  This provides documentation at a level that could
     be used to create a compliant, interoperable implementation of the
     registered "about" URI.  The reference to a full specification MUST
     be provided here, and there should be a reasonable expectation that
     the documentation will remain available.
NEW
   o Specification.  This provides documentation at a level that could
     be used to create a compliant, interoperable implementation of the
     registered "about" URI.  The reference to a full specification must
     be provided here, and there should be a reasonable expectation that
     the documentation will remain available.

Mykyta, please note those changes, address Murray's other comments,
and push out a new rev of the draft (email TXT and XML to
[e-mail] and CC [e-mail] to get
permission).

Barry