> Hi -
> > From: "Eric Burger" <eburge...@standardstrack.com>
> > To: "Narten Thomas" <nar...@us.ibm.com>; "Saint-Andre Peter"
> > <stpe...@stpeter.im>
> > Cc: "IETF discussion list" <ietf@ietf.org>
> > Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 3:08 PM
> > Subject: Re: 2119bis
> >
> > I would assume in the text of the document. This paragraph is simply an
> > enumeration of Burger's Axiom:
> > For every SHOULD, there must be an UNLESS, otherwise the SHOULD is a MAY.
> I disagree.
I concur with your disagreement. SHOULD should *not* be used when the
list of exceptions is known and practically enumerable.
> If the "UNLESS" cases can be fully enumerated, then
> "SHOULD x UNLESS y" is equivalent to "WHEN NOT y MUST X."
> (Both beg the question of whether we would need to spell out that
> "WHEN y MUST NOT X" is not necessarily an appropriate inference.)
> RFC 2119 SHOULD is appropriate when the "UNLESS" cases are
> known (or suspected) to exist, but it is not practical to exhaustively
> identify them all.
> Let's not gild this lily.
+1
Ned
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
