On 3/28/16 9:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Where we can get into real trouble is if a spec contains should, recommended, > may and optional *plus* other non-categorical (fuzzy) words like ought, > encourage, suggest, can, might, allowed, permit (and I did not pull those > words out of the air, but out of draft-hansen-nonkeywords-non2119). What do > they mean? It can be very unclear. If a node receives a message containing > an element covered in the spec by "allowed" instead of "OPTIONAL", is the > receiver supposed to interoperate or to reject the message? Yes, this. There seems to be a sort of MUSTSHOULDMAYphobia. The contortions some people will go through to avoid the words when that is what they mean is, at times, hilarious; but at other times harmful to interoperability. Eliot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature