[dhcwg] Re: Several reminders

Ted Lemon <mellon@nominum.com> Tue, 28 August 2001 01:39 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA06990; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:39:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA15658; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:38:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA15628 for <dhcwg@ns.ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:38:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from toccata.fugue.com (toccata.fugue.com [204.152.186.142]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA06961 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:36:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from grosse.bisbee.fugue.com (user-2inic6l.dialup.mindspring.com [165.121.48.213]) by toccata.fugue.com (8.11.3/8.6.11) with ESMTP id f7S1WFf10317; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grosse.bisbee.fugue.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grosse.bisbee.fugue.com (8.11.3/8.6.11) with ESMTP id f7S1bmT00401; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:37:48 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200108280137.f7S1bmT00401@grosse.bisbee.fugue.com>
To: Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
cc: "DHCP discussion list" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: Message from Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com> of "Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:55:56 PDT." <200108272055.NAA08040@scv3.apple.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:37:48 -0400
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@nominum.com>
Subject: [dhcwg] Re: Several reminders
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org

> I didn't say that you shouldn't have references. What I said was that 
> writing a number in little square brackets doesn't exempt the writer from 
> the normal rules of English grammar. Footnotes and endnotes are not the 
> English language equivalent of "#include".

Ah, I see.

So is what I did misleading or confusing, or do you just think it's
bad style?

If it is the latter, I don't disagree, and I will follow your
recommendations in the next draft I write, but I do not want to have
to change this draft now.   The usage about which you are complaining
was cribbed, IIRC, from a draft that is now an RFC.   :'}

			       _MelloN_

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg