Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
[
Date Prev
][
Date Next
][
Thread Prev
][
Thread Next
][
Date Index
][
Thread Index
]
To
: Nico Williams <
nico@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Subject
: Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From
: Matthew Kerwin <
matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Date
: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 10:52:22 +1000
Cc
: "General Area Review Team \(
gen-art@xxxxxxxx
\)" <
gen-art@xxxxxxxx
>, "
ietf@xxxxxxxx
" <
ietf@xxxxxxxx
>, "
ops-dir@xxxxxxxx
" <
ops-dir@xxxxxxxx
>, "
json@xxxxxxxx
" <
json@xxxxxxxx
>
In-reply-to
: <20141210004925.GQ12979@localhost>
On 10 December 2014 at 10:49, Nico Williams
<
nico@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
wrote:
(yes, I think this should be a 'should', not a 'SHOULD').
Not an 'ought to'?
--
Matthew Kerwin
http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
Follow-Ups
:
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Nico Williams
References
:
Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Black, David
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Nico Williams
RE: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Black, David
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Nico Williams
RE: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Black, David
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
From:
Nico Williams
Prev by Date:
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
Next by Date:
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
Previous by thread:
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
Next by thread:
Re: Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-09
Index(es):
Date
Thread
[Index of Archives]
[IETF Annoucements]
[IETF]
[IP Storage]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCTP]
[Linux Newbies]
[Fedora Users]