Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Mon, 30 June 2008 00:45 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE6B3A6A4F; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CD13A6908 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2YiPVeeoSi6A for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:45:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from m1.imap-partners.net (m1.imap-partners.net [64.13.152.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2DB53A6A6A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:45:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lust.indecency.org (adsl-6-49-233.tys.bellsouth.net [65.6.49.233]) by m1.imap-partners.net (MOS 3.8.4-GA) with ESMTP id AVW82853 (AUTH admin@network-heretics.com) for ietf@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <48682CC5.7060903@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 20:45:57 -0400
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Subject: Re: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
References: <20080525020040.4DE5A5081A@romeo.rtfm.com><F66D7286825402429571678A16C2F5EE03ADF950@zrc2hxm1.corp.nortel.com><20080620195947.29D0B5081A@romeo.rtfm.com><9D9CF008-7350-4831-8F21-E08A0A7B255E@insensate.co.uk><7706.1214216391.855029@peirce.dave.cridland.net><g3ror8$2b9$1@ger.gmane.org><900B2F8D-5960-4277-9DBC-E59A05F1CFBA@cisco.com><48623304.1050008@employees.org><2D990430F5F5D3C7984BDFDF@p3.JCK.COM><48627A42.6030907@employees.org><4862920D.4060003@dcrocker.net><941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF034FC969@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se><48657683.2050608@dcrocker.net><Pine.LNX.4.64.0806271844290.22369@shell4.bayarea.net> <DBE1F9D4-FA3E-4A8F-A90C-8095AEA809DA@muada.com> <00cd01c8da42$592bd280$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <48682946.3000305@bbiw.net>
In-Reply-To: <48682946.3000305@bbiw.net>
Cc: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Dave,

regardless of the original intent of 2119, your belief is inconsistent 
with longstanding IETF process.  you do not get to retroactively change 
the intent of RFCs that have gained consensus and approval.

Keith


Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> 
> Randy Presuhn wrote:
>>> In what universe does that make sense?
>> ...
>>
>> One in which when the photocopier's paper jam light goes, the operator 
>> SHOULD
>>  open the cover and remove any crumpled pieces of paper, which should 
>> resolve
>>  the problem.
>>
>> These are very distinct senses of the word
> 
> 
> Wow. I was not aware that the photocopier manual conformed to RFC 2119.
> 
> The most distinctive characteristic of the postings arguing in favor of 
> imposing
> case sensitivity in documents asserting RFC 2119 semantics is their 
> spontaneous
> invocation of relativity.
> 
> 2119 specifies the meaning of these words... but not relative to 
> whatever other,
> particular interpretation that the posters wants to have held as higher
> precedence.  And certainly not relative to the long-term reality that 
> English
> usage of case has no import on semantics.
> 
> Let's be clear.  No matter its own marginal choices for wording, the 
> document's
> introduction:
> 
>> In many standards track documents several words are used to signify 
>> the requirements in the specification. These words are often 
>> capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be 
>> interpreted in IETF documents.
>>  Authors who follow these guidelines should incorporate this phrase 
>> near the beginning of their document:
> 
> states that the words be used as defined.  Not as defined -- except 
> according to
> the whim of whoever is imposing additional meaning.
> 
> English is not case sensitive.  RFC 2119 does not specify case sensitivity.
> 
> Assertion that case sensitivity is relevant is, therefore, a matter of 
> personal
> whim.  On the average one SHOULD NOT use personal whim as a basis for
> interpreting a technical specifications.
> 
> d/
> 
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf