[rfc-i] "may" (was Re: draft-iab-rfc-editor-model-v2-02 - policy authority)
dhc at dcrocker.net
Wed Jul 13 13:13:13 PDT 2011
>> In this context, to me at least, "may" is an inclusive term and the
>> groups listed are examples, rather like the phrase "topics include,
>> but are not limited to..." that you find in Call for Papers.
> Many people, me included, interpret "may" to mean "optional" or
> "discretionary" -- as indeed RFC-2119 also does. So the effect
> (probably unintentional) of the original phrasing was more
> exclusive than inclusive.
for a bit of distraction, a timely draft might be worth taking a quick moment to
More information about the rfc-interest