On 4/5/21 19:27, Lloyd W wrote:
And I'd like to point out the CAPS standards keywords used throughout draft-knodel-terminology, which are not at all appropriate in informational documents that cannot make such recommendations.
Not terribly relevant to the TERM working group; but just to help people understand how things work around here: there are 1,099 existing informational RFCs that implicitly disagree with Lloyd's characterization.
rfcs$ egrep --files-with-matches "(MUST|SHOULD|MAY|OPTIONAL|RECOMMENDED)" `grep --files-with-matches INFORMATIONAL rfc*.json | sed s/json/txt/` | wc
... 1099 1099 13188 /a
