on 9/24/2002 11:45 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
However the problem is not with a lack of documentation for the terms.
The problem is with community USE of the terms. The community is not
precise. The terms do not have universal, rigorous usage, the way
"meter" or "kilogram" do.
This is problematic all across the IETF. "Mailbox" has different
syntactical meanings across the different messaging RFCs, for example,
sometimes implying a localpart while at other times implying a folder
within a mailstore, and implying some other unit at other times. And lets
not even get started on "domains".
Some RFCs invent their own words. One of the DNS RFCs uses a term which
does not exist in common dictionaries.
I've been wondering for a while if it wouldn't serve the community well
for one of the I* bodies to develop a dictionary for developing and
discussing Internet technologies. This discussion seems to reinforce the
neccessity of such.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/