- From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:18:41 -0400
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51F7D951.3050204@bbs.darktech.org>
Hi, According to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013JulSep/0183.html: The WG practice has been to replace overly restrictive SHOULD with a phrase that lacks the normative strictness while still conveying some importance for the instruction - "ought to". I'd like to propose explicitly defining "ought to" alongside "SHOULD" because it is not clear what the practical difference is between the two. "ought to" is actually a synonym of "should", see http://thesaurus.com/browse/ought+to and http://thesaurus.com/browse/should It seems that you meant for "ought to" to lie somewhere between "MAY" and "SHOULD" but I don't think you're gaining anything by not defining exactly what it means, especially for people whose English is not their first language. Please consider: 1. Replacing "ought to" with a word that is not a synonym of SHOULD, unless you mean SHOULD in which case you should use SHOULD :) 2. Defining "ought to" explicitly at the top of the document. Thank you :) Gili
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 15:19:17 UTC