Commenting only on the idnits specific issue here: On 2005-07-07 22:08 Bruce Lilly said the following: > On Thu July 7 2005 15:32, Ned Freed wrote: [...] >> > Which would presumably mean that the idnits >> > check against that requirement would be dropped, >> >> On the contrary, it is important that automated tools warn that such sections >> are missing. This warning should not prevent a document from being last called, >> however. > > idnits generates a warning because there is a requirement for such a > section. I don't think it is reasonable to expect that an automated > tool will be able to determine whether or not IANA actions would be > required; it is easy to determine whether or not a section is > present. Right. > If the unconditional requirement for a section goes away, > I would expect the test to go away, or to at least require some > non-default option to be specified to enable it. Otherwise it will > appear when there are in fact no IANA actions and then it will be > treated as noise, like the fabled boy who cried "wolf". Yes. When http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html changes, idnits is updated to match. Otherwise, the tool would swiftly become useless. Henrik _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf