Hi, Julian,
I agree with your point here (on how RFC 2119 works). I thought the document
would be clearer with 2119 language here, but it should not be included if
you aren't comfortable using it.
Thanks,
Spencer
Spencer Dawkins wrote:
...
3. WebDAV extended MKCOL
The WebDAV MKCOL request is extended to allow the inclusion of a
request body. The request body is an XML document containing a
single DAV:mkcol XML element as the root element. The Content-Type
Spencer (minor): if I'm reading this paragraph correctly, I'd suggest
"The request body is an XML document that MUST contain a single DAV:mkcol
XML element as the root element" here - the last sentence in this
paragraph makes me think the requirement is normative, but it doesn't
look normative to 2119 scanners :-)
...
-0.5
As far as I can tell, it is a myth that things can only be normative when
using RFC 2119 keywords. As a matter of fact, RFC 2119 points out:
6. Guidance in the use of these Imperatives
Imperatives of the type defined in this memo must be used with care
and sparingly. In particular, they MUST only be used where it is
actually required for interoperation or to limit behavior which has
potential for causing harm (e.g., limiting retransmisssions) For
example, they must not be used to try to impose a particular method
on implementors where the method is not required for
interoperability.
So I'd prefer document authors to be more conservative in using those
terms...
BR, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf