On Sep 17, 2013 6:33 AM, "Dave Cridland" <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Olaf Kolkman <olaf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on the conversation below I converged to:
>>
>>
>> <t>
>> While less mature specifications will usually be published as
>> Informational or Experimental RFCs, the IETF may, in exceptional
>> cases, publish a specification that still contains areas for
>> improvement or certain uncertainties about whether the best
>> engineering choices are made. In those cases that fact will be
>> clearly and prominently communicated in the document e.g. in the
>> abstract, the introduction, or a separate section or statement.
>> </t>
>>
>
> I read John's message as being against the use of the phrase "in exceptional cases". I would also like to avoid that; it suggests that some exceptional argument may have to be made, and has the implication that it essentially operates outside the process.
>
> I would prefer the less formidable-sounding "on occasion", which still implies relative rarity.
>
> Dave.
Exceptions and arguments for and against are part of the process. Having a process with no consideration for exceptions would be exceptional.