[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Ltru] Issue #41 (AD comment #8) section 3.5 SHOULD vs MUST



Sorry, I hit Send prematurely.

Mark Davis wrote:

I think it should be a MUST. A SHOULD implies that you don't need to do it if there are good / reasonable reasons not to. That isn't the case here; the requirements are clear.

That doesn't prevent us from taking the request and making fixes to format, spelling, etc before approving.

I think it comes down to how much deviation is acceptable. RFC 4646bis is a long document with some rather arcane rules, and it is likely that at least one very sensible subtag request will come along on ietf-languages that doesn't conform completely to the RFC. The question is whether such a request will be rejected summarily, or sent back to the requestor with instructions to fix the errors, or whether the deviations are of such a nature that ietf-languages and the Reviewer can figure out what is meant and (with approval of the requestor) correct them as necessary. Debbie Garside and I had a useful discussion about this 2 years ago; see http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/2007-January/005719.html .

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ


Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.