Mykyta says...
I personally use SHALL when
I mean "it is to be so" and not strict "it is mandatory and obligatory and
compulsory and <...> to be so".
But, see, this is exactly the sort of problem we're talking about.
You make some sort of semantic (not just stylistic) distinction
between MUST and SHALL. Yet RFC 2119 does not; it defines them as
synonyms. In a document that uses these terms according to RFC 2119,
they mean exactly the same thing, and they are interchangeable.
Barry
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf