Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Hector Santos followed up Crocker'ss passing of the buck:
Please refrain from passing the buck to the WG. The document editors
are:
D. Crocker (editor)
Tony Hansen (editor)
M. Kucherawy (editor)
If the WG was technically incapable as you are implying, then the
*onus* was on the editors to make sure it was writing correctly.
Given that it's been pointed out the use of SHOULD in this case
is entirely appropriate, I'm happy to accept blame on behalf of
the other authors for getting it right.
With all due respect, for the record, actually it was the original
editors/authors:
E. Allman
J. Callas
M. Delany
M. Libbey
J. Fenton
M. Thomas
with the April 2006 draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 original text. Updated in
August 2006 base-05 draft update to clarify the 2nd paragraph in
particular regarding Unix (LF) vs DOS (CRLF) translation requirements,
and it (correctly) has remained that way since then. This
unfortunate issue is with new editors trying to change it and then
labeling the WG for not understanding RFC2119 as a reason.
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html