Re: Protocol Action: 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS' to Proposed Standard

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

Bob:

I am not pushing for one or the other for this document.  I'm simply 
pointing out that the authors used the same title case as the 
document that is being updated.

Russ

At 01:39 PM 4/7/2008, Bob Braden wrote:


>   *>
>   *> See RFC 3501
>   *>
>
>Russ,
>
>I am trying to figure out whether you are serious.  Of course, there
>have been individual failures in the past.  In fact, 821 or 822 (I foreget
>which) was a title-case failure.  But the existence of an occasional
>error does not seem to justify deliberately doing it wrong in the
>future.  (I will have to admit to a certain bias... upper-cased
>titles remind me of the days when network-illiterate Big Iron
>users would sometimes send all-caps messages to the Internet.)  It
>is generally agreed, I believe, that some reasonable uniformity of
>style is desirable in the RFC series.  And the title appears in the
>index and a dumb-looking title stands out as a wierdness.
>
>Bob Braden
>
>   *> At 05:27 PM 4/3/2008, Bob Braden wrote:
>   *>
>   *>
>   *> >   *> The IESG has approved the following document:
>   *> >   *>
>   *> >   *> - 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD 
> EXTENSIONS '
>   *> >   *>    <draft-ietf-imapext-sort-20.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>   *> >   *>
>   *> >
>   *> >Why is this document shouting at us?  Title case is the norm for
>   *> >RFCs.
>   *> >
>   *> >RFC Editor/bb
>   *> >
>   *> >  *> Two simple/optional improvements:
>   *> >   *> Add a normative reference to STD 63 (RFC3629) for UTF-8.
>   *> >   *> Instead of allowing any 8-bit in BLOBCHAR and NONWSP,
>   *> > reference the rules
>   *> >   *> in RFC 3629 for well-formed UTF-8 (UTF8-2, UTF8-3, UTF8-4).
>   *> >   *>
>   *>