Re: PS Characterization Clarified

[Scott Brim <[e-mail]>]

On Sep 17, 2013 6:33 AM, "Dave Cridland" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Olaf Kolkman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on the conversation below I converged to:
>>
>>
>>    <t>
>>       While less mature specifications will usually be published as
>>       Informational or Experimental RFCs, the IETF may, in exceptional
>>       cases, publish a specification that still contains areas for
>>       improvement or certain uncertainties about whether the best
>>       engineering choices are made.  In those cases that fact will be
>>       clearly and prominently communicated in the document e.g. in the
>>       abstract, the introduction, or a separate section or statement.
>>     </t>
>>
>
> I read John's message as being against the use of the phrase "in
exceptional cases". I would also like to avoid that; it suggests that some
exceptional argument may have to be made, and has the implication that it
essentially operates outside the process.
>
> I would prefer the less formidable-sounding "on occasion", which still
implies relative rarity.
>
> Dave.

Exceptions and arguments for and against are part of the process. Having a
process with no consideration for exceptions would be exceptional.