Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
> My personal viewpoint is that it would be inappropriate to strictly
enforce a limit of 5 authors. The use of 'should' in section 2.2,
item 2 of the current document ('There should not be more than 5
authors/editors') seems appropriate given the current RFC Editor
policy, and tools-wise this would then be implemented as a note or
warning at the most, but should never cause a refusal to accept a draft
submission.
1. "enforce a limit" moves a should to a must.
2. The RFC Editor's policy document does not use language that is as strong as a
should.
Hence, the ID Checklist is making a normative statement stronger than the RFC
Editor and the proposal for the checker to 'enforce' is even stronger than that.
By contrast, last sentence suggesting simply printing a notice that there are
more authors than preferred captures the RFC Editor policy's statement.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf