Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2008-03-07 12:34, Dave Crocker wrote:
Sam Hartman wrote:
Making it a BCP will make the interpretation problem worse not better.
To some extent that depends on how carefully the putative BCP
is crafted, with "should" and when to disregard "should" being
very precise. What I think we've seen, with 2026 over the years,
and apparently this year with 3777, is that it's virtually
impossible to write precise procedural text ...
I see your point.
What I don't see is why the IETF's efforts at writing and enforcing procedural
rules would be so much less successful than the efforts to create laws,
contracts, and the formal rules that govern so many other organizations.
The real irony, of course, is that we are community whose main work is to write
formal procedures and make then into formal standards. So we probably ought to
view it as a tad embarrassing that we can't do that adequately for our
IETF mailing list