Gotta draw a line somewhere, Doug.
(RFC? IMO? IETF?)
The RFC Editor draws that line for us. The list at the page I referenced is
constructed by the RFC Editor based on input from the community. I'm guessing
things can be deleted as well as added.
A (stands for Adrian)
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Barton [mailto:dougb(_at_)dougbarton(_dot_)us]
Sent: 24 May 2011 19:11
To: adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk
Cc: 'Roni Even';
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-enhanced-dsmap(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org;
gen-
art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; 'IETF-Discussion list'
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-enhanced-dsmap-09
On 05/24/2011 03:15, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Thanks Roni,
Nits/editorial comments:
1. Need to expand LDP when first mentioned.
LDP is a recognised acronym at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt and does not
need
to be expanded.
And how would someone new to the RFC series know that? :)
IMO one should always expand acronyms the first time they are used. It
adds clarity to the text for new readers, and even for old hands it's
sometimes necessary to disambiguate recycled TLAs.
Doug (three-letter acroynms)
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf