IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Fuzzy words [was Uppercase question for RFC2119 words]

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Tue, 29 March 2016 13:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.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 D23FC12D106 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 06:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-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 (1024-bit key) header.d=cridland.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 umEijhRst8fB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 06:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (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 D526F12D816 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 06:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id r72so57754435wmg.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 06:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=b0zlt7phyj/6fHDqKbvErffnm/vFsuywnQ+0KbQrcSI=; b=hGv56eEIPsw/cN78Cg8d3ubyVlpO9dnhlkkCR3vCaZaibuaQR3/QwXci7aonjtug4x P9UATYewrPiSPOyWsvGAk4KD7m7qUJ7ukR4cOaPOljljW47xR1mxSz2rsdAtkkOa2pPA oOiDsWQskbpNcnHkQ10AVMH5oWRzyujfcl3NE=
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=b0zlt7phyj/6fHDqKbvErffnm/vFsuywnQ+0KbQrcSI=; b=ftluF92i8eNFRIL6oT/A0YWn8832aI1wV157dFRRE1eEBYVpfyfwmrQe/n7Lt4Xaji PXDckGeTsPd4cFwjtjqWzxkHDEmm4Mw0nHgktiZhuUFbb5BRqod8VTOMMog1s9GsWBEQ TVw3j1sESKS3IkrP6mVV72u1/Ge+UFJu6Ja1PbDF7e5K5BpcSb0NJ8Gsdkaz7+cHQkH2 PPN68J+gv1+kvQeLdMVL7Su9+9aeuC0q2bPZwDGhxim4RMqv8UOBli1gOS38SZtnznso BTpi+dKlQWE7GJ8AHjlv5K+tPWpYSvkf9tJuGPiEL0VAlRpQKmXdvnaaN6W+B4VDPRix ZWWw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJiXGltGqm01+zNCqzHcqNQA3JvvGsswz01g5AMXt7wQWn3H3IcwZE4tO5jnLN4Qf9S413b7KShE2gZK0Vd
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.123.102 with SMTP id lz6mr3223951wjb.2.1459259181321; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 06:46:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.37.199 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 06:46:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C03CD9A5D2557590F3F710C2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
References: <20160320223116.8946.76840.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADEAFFC7@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADEB0D16@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <56F79D05.8070004@alvestrand.no> <326E6502-28E5-4D09-BB99-4A5D80625EB0@stewe.org> <56F88E18.2060506@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <20160328104731.GO88304@verdi> <CALaySJ+hYMMsKE7Ws-NJbyqH55E-mQM-duTEcJGc0TWvTP88Ew@mail.gmail.com> <20160328132859.GP88304@verdi> <28975138-9EA1-4A9F-A6C0-BC1416B8EA44@sobco.com> <CALaySJJkNj2jfm0gJpuDzq8oFDjTNn-uQ5MHdmEOLwTiFZUyQQ@mail.gmail.com> <8975F15F-5C4C-4D02-98CD-BF4FDF104D35@sobco.com> <56F98CD1.10706@gmail.com> <CALaySJJ0WTU5m3b6Cad7ULyLHzpWeTpTFpu-y=hHyoYs5xqsXg@mail.gmail.com> <B0FC9E8C-9F20-43D0-904A-31BC19A9C476@sobco.com> <C03CD9A5D2557590F3F710C2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 14:46:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzxm_2e7H0URpAsNO7BikwgaAmMvucYyEZ_M+NvND3JemA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Fuzzy words [was Uppercase question for RFC2119 words]
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01160950236d26052f30418c"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_Fi0NIOtkJeU_h6UwaqGY9ZnHu4>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org>, rtcweb@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.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: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 13:46:34 -0000

On 29 March 2016 at 12:57, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:

>
>
> --On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 07:27 -0400 Scott Bradner
> <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
>
> > fwiw - seems to me that the basic idea that MUST and must are
> > the same is wrong and will lead to  even more confusion
> >
> > imo - any clarification should (not SHOULD - i.e. the english
> > language) say
> >       1/ some authors capitalize some words for
> > emphasis and clarity
> >       2/ there is no requirement to use
> > capitalized words
> >  2/ when capitalized words are used RFC
> > 2119 says what the capitalized words mean
> >       3/ non capitalized words are interpreted
> >   using normal English
>
> Agreed, if your second #2 is modified to read "when capitalized
> words are used and RFC 2119 is explicitly and normatively
> referenced, RFC 2119 says what the capitalized words mean".   In
> other words, there is no universal applicability of 2119 -- if I
> write a document that says "where this document says 'MUST', it
> means you should (sic) do it if you find it convenient". that
> might well be editorially dumb, but 2119 has nothing to do with
> it, nor does it prevent such a definition.
>
>
Agreed, but we should (ought to, probably wish to, etc) consider a
replacement for the following:

      The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
      NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and
      "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
      RFC 2119.

Perhaps simply:

      The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
      NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and
      "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
      RFC 2119 when capitalised.



>    john
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email