ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: What Meng said

2004-08-11 16:29:41

On Wednesday, August 11, 2004 1:57 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:

Jim,

JL> I tend to agree.  Should we remove the language about the future 
JL> from the SUBMITTER spec?


 my very strong, personal preference is to have a 
specification make no  statements about the future, and 
particularly not about plans.

 the one exception, of course, is to show technical possibilities.
 examples of how a spec is capable of being enhanced.  not 
will be, not  planned to be, but what technical flexibilities 
are present.

 and of course it's always good to show examples of how the 
spec might  be used NOW (or, rather, after it is published...)

 sorry for being so pedantic, but i want to be clear about 
what i do  mean by the suggestion.


I did remove references to future behavior from the -02 version of the
Submitter spec.  Please see the change notes at the end of that doc.  If
I missed any occurrences, please let me know and I'll remove them for
-03.  


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>