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@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf