On 4 October 2011 16:17, Barry Leiba wrote:
I suggest using "document" instead of "codify" as this is not
being standardized.
That's a sensible change.
[Insert DEnglish disclaimer:] For "document" I read "we say so", for
"codify" I read "we say so, and we mean it". While this memo is no
standard, it is still a recommendation; "codify" (desired behaviour)
instead of "document" (observed behaviour) makes sense for me.
MAAWG [1] is the largest global industry association working
against Spam, viruses, denial-of-service attacks and other online
exploitation.
[...]
Could the PR blurb be removed?
I think it's useful in this document. People reading IETF documents
aren't likely to know what MAAWG is, and a short paragraph doesn't
seem untoward. I'd agree, if there were excessively long text for
this, but it's brief.
In Wikipedia the "largest" would immediately get a "citation needed"
flag; it sounds like spam. With a reliable third party reference it
might be possible to say "as of 2011 was the largest"; but do we care
who was "the largest whatever" at the time of the RFC publication?
IMO saying "is a large whatever" would be better. Presumably readers
of this RFC know MAAWG; otherwise they might be in to grok dozens of
ASRG acronyms and mail-abuse RFCs before they'll understand this RFC.
-Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf