- From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:35:32 -0400
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM wrote: > MAYs are untestable, by definition Since MAY is semantically equivalent to > MAY NOT, there is no way to test the hypothesis that an implementation > conforms to the statement. > > SHOULDs are also untestable by definition, since an application is allowed But it can be useful to know which choices your server makes. For example, if I have an HTTP client application that requires Digest-Authentication, then, as far as I'm concerned, that MAY becomes a MUST. (I make no comment on whether the IETF should get involved. :-) -- /==============================================================\ |John Stracke | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.| |Chief Scientist |=============================================| |eCal Corp. |"You're nothing but a pack of ringleaders!" | |francis@ecal.com|--_Wyrd Sisters_, Terry Pratchett | \==============================================================/
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2000 08:40:10 UTC