On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, John C Klensin wrote:
"...believed to violate..."
"...putatively violates..."
"...alleged to violate..."
and other phrases would, I think, satisfy both Scott's concerns
and yours.
Sure, I'm good with that. How about:
"...an explanation of how the decision or action is thought to violate
the BCPs..."
These are the sort of language/presentation details that I wish
we could assume that final editing would straighten out. It is
not a good sign that we think we need to fix them on the IETF
list.
Oops, I thought that had been done, and we were looking a final drafts.
john
--
Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf