- 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