[rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group"

Andrew G. Malis agmalis at gmail.com
Sat Apr 8 14:36:42 PDT 2017


Paul,

I also prefer “Working Group”, and agree that we should pick one and be
consistent going forward. The exception, I guess, would be if the RFC was
discussing something other than an IETF Working Group, but that seems
unlikely.

Cheers,
Andy


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> wrote:

> From RFC 7322:
>
> . . .
>    Where the RFC Editor may suggest
>    changes in wording for clarity and readability, it is up to the
>    author, working group, or stream-approving body to determine whether
>    the changes have an impact on the technical meaning of the document
>    [RFC4844].
> . . .
>       It is a list of abbreviations appearing in RFCs and
>       sometimes reflects discussions with authors, Working Group Chairs,
>       and/or Area Directors (ADs).
>
> From https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt:
>
> WG        *- Working Group
>
> From the directory of all RFCs:
>
> # grep "working group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l
>      587
> # grep "Working Group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l
>      379
>
> I prefer "Working Group" to "working group". Regardless, we should
> probably pick one.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20170408/fd316fa4/attachment.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list