[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
> 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
> > normative, it is by definition which is not the same thing.
> The latter seems better to me for the exact reason you give.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest