I would assume in the text of the document. This paragraph is simply an
enumeration of Burger's Axiom:
For every SHOULD, there must be an UNLESS, otherwise the SHOULD is a
MAY.
On Aug 29, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Thomas Narten wrote:
It would help me if you explained the diffs and the *reasons* for the
proposed changes.
E.g, the new text says:
This term means that the feature or behavior is a limited requirement
of the specification, so that an implementation has a conditional
obligation to implement the feature or to behave as defined, unless
there is a strong, explicitly described reason not to do so in
particular circumstances. Those who implement the specification or
deploy conformant technologies need to understand and carefully weigh
the full implications of violating the requirement before doing so.
The term "RECOMMENDED" is equivalent to "SHOULD".
The wording "unless there is a strong explicitly described reason not
to do so in particular circumstances" is new wording and my first
reaction is it's not helpful. I.e., "explicitely described by who?"
Explicitely specified in the text? If so, that seems unworkable in
practice.
What problem is this bis document intended to fix?
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf