----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Barton" <dougb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Cc: "Barry Leiba" <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 7:18 AM > On 05/16/2012 06:59, Barry Leiba wrote: > > In fact, RFC 2119 says that the normative keywords are "often > > capitalized", but doesn't require that they be. > > Standards should be written in such a way as to remove as much ambiguity > as possible, not show how clever we are. That allowance in 2119 was a > mistake, and the fact that people remain confused 15 years later is > clear evidence of that. > > Normative use of the 2119 key words should always be capitalized. > > And yes, "can" is about ability, "may" is about permission. Choosing to > add to the confusion about the simple English meaning of those words > doesn't make us look any more clever. Yes, normative use should be capitalised and non-normative use should be avoided, but there is also a distinction to be drawn between MAY and the others. Frequently, at or around WG Last Call, the question arises as to the meaning of MAY, the conclusion often being that it is meaningless; this MAY or MAY NOT be the case, so who cares, why bother? MUST and SHOULD are quite different, they do have a force to them and they are distinct. SO while I would not comment on the use of 'may', I would comment on the use of 'should' or 'must'; the latter confuse, the former, who cares? Tom Petch > > Doug > > -- > If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough >