[rfc-i] Drafting issue... use of MAY

Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) rse at rfc-editor.org
Tue May 1 09:34:58 PDT 2018


On 5/1/18 8:00 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> The reason this became a concern was that I turned on a doohickey in 
> my document formatting tool which compiles tables of MUST/MAY/SHOULD 
> for conformance.
>
> Minimizing the number of MAYs becomes a bigger concern when you see 
> the consequences.

Requirements language isn't all about MUST; the other words are equally 
important.

>
> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org 
> <mailto:paul.hoffman at vpnc.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 1 May 2018, at 7:17, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
>     > Quite often in a spec, I find myself writing something like this:
>     >
>     > A Frame MAY be either buffered or unbuffered...
>     >
>     > Frames are either buffered or unbuffered...
>     >
>     >
>     > Which is correct? I am thinking the second because it is not
>     actually
>     > normative, it is by definition which is not the same thing.
>
>     The latter seems better to me for the exact reason you give.
>

Agreed.

-Heather
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20180501/49e8aca9/attachment.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list