Re: PS Characterization Clarified

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:47 +0200 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 suggest that "communicated in the document e.g. in..." now
essentially amounts to "... communicated in the document, e.g.
in the document." since the examples span the entire set of
possibilities.   Consequently, for editorial reasons and in the
interest of brevity, I recommend just stopping after
"prominently communicated in the document.".  But, since the
added words are not harmful, I have no problem with your leaving
them if you prefer.

   john