- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 22:20:44 +0100
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
* Martin Thomson wrote: >On 13 January 2015 at 08:30, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> Some people in the IETF believe it's equivalent to "OPTIONAL", while others >> disagree. I recommend to uppercase "optional" where it's supposed to express >> a requirement, and to choose a different where it's not. > > >Or do this: > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", >"SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD >- NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document >are to be interpreted as >+ NOT", "RECOMMENDED", and "MAY" in this document are to be >interpreted as > described in <xref target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>. I think omitting some keywords from the boilerplate is a bad and risky practise that does not really remove the problem that using "optional" invites confusion. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015) · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2015 21:21:14 UTC