IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RFC 2119 terms, ALL CAPS vs lower case

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Fri, 18 May 2012 05:07 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.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 4ABEB21F86FA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 May 2012 22:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.495
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.182, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, HOST_MISMATCH_COM=0.311]
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 Lpwg1em+im-y for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 May 2012 22:07:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ftp.catinthebox.net (ntbbs.santronics.com [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A41A321F86F5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 May 2012 22:07:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=806; t=1337317614; h=Received:Received: Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject: List-ID; bh=Lc5kNJUTZT+J21dOkfN3m0jldO4=; b=g6gSzKlLmRuE25NsxP35 WdHD4Uya+teV11BdkCn8AxkbPw1mV0F1mQP/WtNY0Dcflr2RDo+7oAI7QUceVExD IKEpuMaZRlHGAnCgLZygnQn9Tpex1de4y43IKlLSiCr8UTFPMw6GMXWUf9o+70tq sp87U1h86OggniaiDVzA4ZQ=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v6.4.454.1) for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:06:54 -0400
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; adsp=pass policy=all author.d=isdg.net asl.d=beta.winserver.com;
Received: from beta.winserver.com ([208.247.131.23]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v6.4.454.1) with ESMTP id 1929440449.90.4012; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:06:53 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=806; t=1337317588; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=Psz3A9S 7g8ovzsvsAdiJuvhCpUOHXMb55yyoxHst1XA=; b=qeObEkavNqf8ShctHjXwFNu tgYY2LCMgzqkHz5UXJd8r0H89KaGVSmdSj54/CQq40Lhl5IA1nIgDI7u9i+ne9wU Nvy2+5VWr63uFqETW0f7Pz+q8NhyeDm2zZwy+ybyMgh9q9vgSPNPkOT3zoe1y1DD q4Vzf8eDH4Y77C4JqG6o=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v6.4.454.1) for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:06:28 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([99.3.147.93]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v6.4.454.1) with ESMTP id 2528320847.8002.3232; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:06:27 -0400
Message-ID: <4FB5D8E0.8060306@isdg.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 01:06:40 -0400
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>
Subject: Re: RFC 2119 terms, ALL CAPS vs lower case
References: <562A61B995B24BD854A4D154@[192.168.0.2]> <m262bwchr9.wl%randy@psg.com> <08ab01cd3372$65934110$30b9c330$@olddog.co.uk> <tslaa18w21n.fsf@mit.edu> <4FB3E99D.1040606@stpeter.im> <4FB3EDB8.60809@gmail.com> <m2mx57c2g5.wl%randy@psg.com> <22965.1337200180.525898@puncture> <006601cd3451$2aaa94b0$7fffbe10$@asgard.org>
In-Reply-To: <006601cd3451$2aaa94b0$7fffbe10$@asgard.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 'IETF-Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 18 May 2012 05:07:02 -0000

Lee Howard wrote:
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Dave Cridland
>> Consider:
>>
>> "An octet may contain 0-255".
>> "An octet contains 0-255".
>> "An octet might contain 0-255" - or it might not?
>> "The Foo octet MUST lie between 0 and 127 inclusive; that is, the highest
> bit MUST NOT
>> be set."
>> "A valid Foo octet lies between 0 and 127 inclusive; that is, the highest
> bit is never set."
> 
> We do not improve clarity by making sentences harder to read.

Or colorizing it.

> We should avoid rfc2119 language where possible, to be clear, but not at the
> expense of clarity.

+1, I think this is more specific to documents and not RFC2119. I 
don't think we can generalize RFC2119.


-- 
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email