Re: RFC 2119 terms, ALL CAPS vs lower case

Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> Thu, 17 May 2012 06:18 UTC

Return-Path: <dougb@dougbarton.us>
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 D644A11E8081 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 May 2012 23:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.995
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.995 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.604, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 pHNqJOFxXCjV for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 May 2012 23:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2280111E8076 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 May 2012 23:18:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 25594 invoked by uid 399); 17 May 2012 06:18:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO opti.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@12.207.105.210) by mail2.fluidhosting.com with ESMTPAM; 17 May 2012 06:18:34 -0000
X-Originating-IP: 12.207.105.210
X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us
Message-ID: <4FB49838.6050300@dougbarton.us>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 23:18:32 -0700
From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120506 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: RFC 2119 terms, ALL CAPS vs lower case
References: <562A61B995B24BD854A4D154@[192.168.0.2]>
In-Reply-To: <562A61B995B24BD854A4D154@[192.168.0.2]>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5pre
OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.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: Thu, 17 May 2012 06:18:39 -0000

On 05/16/2012 06:59, Barry Leiba wrote:
> In fact, RFC 2119 says that the normative keywords are "often
> capitalized", but doesn't require that they be.

Standards should be written in such a way as to remove as much ambiguity
as possible, not show how clever we are. That allowance in 2119 was a
mistake, and the fact that people remain confused 15 years later is
clear evidence of that.

Normative use of the 2119 key words should always be capitalized.

And yes, "can" is about ability, "may" is about permission. Choosing to
add to the confusion about the simple English meaning of those words
doesn't make us look any more clever.

Doug

-- 
    If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough