Re: New Version Notification for draft-leiba-rfc2119-update-00.txt

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sat, 13 August 2016 00:34 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E44A212D92F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=dcrocker.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6w37veq-hQgk for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (unknown [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 204F612D92C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id u7D0YuWb029599 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:34:56 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1471048496; bh=Re01RkyszF06rdkFwKVrRqatXo4NJU6mm4N+HyTnwI8=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=T7Nmx8+xqL9PLO7n5Zzzjh2A4OE0pILQEoHtWcRsVLP3jNOO/bBleFg6sc7Nt1ieW pGiw8iOzov40onrdPTP4GGh5iHuZfHDQM6EDhKIvX5GFW1VrBjEkI7VgSvGpEn1lHg fps03VcbvPVN+G4SwipO2ZGONkCyLdu7A+9Whkdo=
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-leiba-rfc2119-update-00.txt
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
References: <147077254472.30640.13738163813175851232.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALaySJLHx7ytgZqZ9zQXA3vVSU-pNggQQs+QiDnzQ4tBEH5VAQ@mail.gmail.com> <B31EEDDDB8ED7E4A93FDF12A4EECD30D9240CC47@GLKXM0002V.GREENLNK.net> <f30c2fb9-2f84-4ff1-8bd2-f70fe4201838@gmail.com> <379B29D6-2C56-4EB1-BA50-4740A605C9D0@qti.qualcomm.com> <6433bb28-3e68-a18b-6bec-6017701baa03@isi.edu> <5A419C3F-E7C7-47E8-B1D6-ED5F09AFED89@qti.qualcomm.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <69e9a8ce-225d-8288-560e-61529d0045d9@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:34:21 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5A419C3F-E7C7-47E8-B1D6-ED5F09AFED89@qti.qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-m2IqSDoEzxW5SoVPbKhd9GrHLg>
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 00:34:54 -0000

On 8/12/2016 5:20 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
>     It's inefficient to repeat the phrase "X MUST be supported by any
>     implementation that complies with this specification".
>
> Perfect example. That passive construction is just as bad as "X is
> REQUIRED".


These sorts of exchanges remind me of just how differently people view 
the concept of clarity in writing.

And that tends to prompt me to recall a rather interesting article in 
Datamation magazine, many years ago, back when I was first learning 
concepts of clear programming and the world was wresting with different 
views on how to achieve it, with Dijkstra's "GOTO Statement Considered 
Harmful" article holding particular sway.

In this midst of that, it took me an embarrassingly long time to comprehend:

    https://www.fortran.com/come_from.html


d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net