Re: 2119bis

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



+1, too.

This goes along with my strong desire to eliminate passive voice, unless the goal is to have the actor be obfuscated (as an example).

On Aug 30, 2011, at 5:29 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:

2) I strongly believe that authors should be encouraged to enumerate the potential subjects of conformance terms, and to use them in every instance.

For example, a requirement like this:

"""The Foo header MUST contain the "bar" directive"""

is ambiguous; it doesn't specify who has to do what. Rather,

"""Senders MUST include the "bar" directive when producing the Foo header; recipients that receive a Foo header without a "bar" directive MUST ..."""

is unambiguous (assuming that the spec defines the terms "sender" and "recipient").

+1.

<<attachment: smime.p7s>>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]