Re: My two cents on draft-leiba-rfc2119-update

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Wed, 10 August 2016 17:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 ABC7A12D610 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 qv82i20hKd6F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCDF912B032 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:03:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id q128so106078379wma.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:03:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qaC0HuCjgJCFTCi49+ItIsM+VjcIrqgDLMSquYueRKo=; b=Uwq+0mFj1/vd88HLloaKg7YgGv0HEJn4Us67j0Gp1JjdswWu5opTlGtAC+yxJD+7tO ksGnrn0Rt8QpG2gEM/+zAODofsx7LSciYQdanTKK5Rs+GtFvRbCVjDiOhLIEEAjpki/I ibSAF7lraRfP1TWkdnarPBCmL+ypjp/dhtjCThnaijaetEz9wYCamwZn7B41XZ2s44Za 0MR621xMuZlaR22aNDOZl7O9fXcBqhfVtXQTjhCB7FHNTgR+NuaKPadVGKgwx/jkLWpR WX7pXzYtRqOnlb63FgyNTtyC7coSHiIib8k/3ehWTZhSVxu/cfE921UrzCXn8/QKJWWh yW4g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qaC0HuCjgJCFTCi49+ItIsM+VjcIrqgDLMSquYueRKo=; b=Arom38pu3/yT0Iew21HEu6TQDpi6VKzynZ3QLRj3hrqb4DzISZL3T5o7OGDR40K/xO eafXqq8HzynpVZZf+e3p4IGKZN4govmb/HafCsnZff3Ur0RopTFaRCP8lW5XR4cbO2R5 Vu9TkMua9mkxX6GXu7CWsKClY21zDwzCA0NkMMWe0QbGhcRw0Il1mAAijYnVqX55IQ39 3ks0bGz4HlAlnA8/1UiEvvmZPnOlNI0XO3wcOgqtu/10y1ENI/QvBBqR4QvXvOcdyO9X XaQg1ZAZFsqDqTjYUvHm5Z/66e6yHbthP15tl5m8BZQ7gLj8yAtvk4EpIvo0bh46iz1Y ZUZw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoout5qeG7uqlILuF6UDXI0/Axg73ayZ0T8eA+h8l+jEBpgEp6Wdn3C69+Xok5J7nR6+49J0vdmpO2ZP8i4Q==
X-Received: by 10.46.32.139 with SMTP id g11mr833277lji.28.1470848636356; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.217.93 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLpmBGxORq-q-LHoWaxq2ZdQeMqUD36j-EapJj1oAJn8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <0f2001d1f324$7efe43e0$7cfacba0$@olddog.co.uk> <CALaySJLpmBGxORq-q-LHoWaxq2ZdQeMqUD36j-EapJj1oAJn8A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 13:03:15 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1mqgYA6-bW4WOU3o+LL-F=Hbhx+zpdJ1+vV5fMwqNDNzA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: My two cents on draft-leiba-rfc2119-update
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1142b98e7d1ced0539baa2c3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/GWnMJNAUJ6q7r6BPt2ArJlK6sWo>
Cc: draft-leiba-rfc2119-update.all@ietf.org, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:04:01 -0000

Yup, the re-arguing thing is why I think this is a good idea.   I just
don't think it should directly update 2119.   The XML markup is also a good
idea, and another good motivating factor for doing this work.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
wrote:

> Just one bit here:
>
> >    In many standards track documents several words are used to signify
> >    the requirements in the specification.  These words are often
> >    capitalized, as shown below, but they do not have to be.  This
> >    document defines how these words are interpreted in IETF documents
> >    when the words are capitalized and/or marked as <bcp14> in the
> >
> > This appears to say (well, it does say) that "the words" are used to
> "signify"
> > the requirements and are not always capitalised when they do. It then
> says it
> > defines how they are interpreted when capitalised "and/or" marked with
> BCP14,
> > which implies that if I use lower case but reference BCP14 then the
> > interpretation provided by this document applies. The later attempt to
> disclaim
> > definition of "normal English meanings" runs counter to these two
> statements.
>
> It's more than "referencing" BCP 14: it's using specific XML markup to
> mark them as BCP 14 key words.  They will be rendered in all caps in
> the generated plain text, PDF, and HTML.
>
> OK, and a second bit:
> There *is* a problem that this is fixing: we (collectively) spend a
> lot of time messing with this -- discussing, in document after
> document, whether lower-case versions matter, and what should be what.
> This document is attempting to get rough-consensus answers so the
> questions don't have to be re-argued over and over.
>
> Barry
>
>