IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to"

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Wed, 31 July 2013 13:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0AAB21E80CA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.487
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nU6GgM7stuML for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:46:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A2E21F9EC4 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1V4Whq-000709-W7 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:44:47 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:44:46 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1V4Whq-000709-W7@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <lear@cisco.com>) id 1V4Whd-0006yg-T2 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:44:33 +0000
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.140]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <lear@cisco.com>) id 1V4Whc-0006wQ-O2 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:44:33 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=335; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1375278272; x=1376487872; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=j1MycoDH2IxxHNThS+SN6I/PMJeRlq/MKyxBkfMsHFU=; b=TP8+C2r4uJJnWHQDw+DyxvkaZQTdOLouJCY3XJoFaetEM6PGOZWqpw+Z 1XQQoWypTtXI8Gux82tk48W88i8klknVQY4G6gN5mOrNEzZo7avY04WW/ qyuWKoWFkjKkeLfwyO8F0nJ8kDGvYHdfkmXfEv9nyxumr4yvj3NQy5Ouk w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAAoU+VGQ/khM/2dsb2JhbABbgwaEFbsNgRgWdIIkAQEBBCNVARALDgoCAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBKxoGDQEHAQGIDKcXkVKBKI5fB4JlgSYDl1+RTYMWOg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,787,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="157797533"
Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2013 13:44:06 +0000
Received: from mctiny.local ([10.61.196.104]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6VDi4nm026389 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:44:04 GMT
Message-ID: <51F914A4.4050500@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:44:04 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <51F7D951.3050204@bbs.darktech.org> <51F7DBF5.3030403@gmx.de> <51F89572.1080506@dcrocker.net> <51F8C1D4.6010409@gmx.de> <51F8C30C.2060103@dcrocker.net> <20130731080256.GD7351@1wt.eu> <51F8CFCA.3090800@cisco.com> <6BE56F0C-0ADB-4545-9D67-E51368A22BAA@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <6BE56F0C-0ADB-4545-9D67-E51368A22BAA@mnot.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=144.254.224.140; envelope-from=lear@cisco.com; helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.131, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.507, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1V4Whc-0006wQ-O2 e3ae31250317d11847194e45b62f9805
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: NEW ISSUE: Define "ought to"
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/51F914A4.4050500@cisco.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/19012
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On 7/31/13 10:58 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> This is a *fascinating* thread, but until there's some general IETF consensus on such matters, I'm inclined to leave the decision about specific language in the hands of the editors; they've done well so far.
>

There is an IETF consensus on such matters.  It is RFC 2119.

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email