+1, too. This goes along with my strong desire to eliminate passive voice, unless the goal is to have the actor be obfuscated (as an example).
On Aug 30, 2011, at 5:29 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: >> 2) I strongly believe that authors should be encouraged to enumerate the >> potential subjects of conformance terms, and to use them in every instance. >> >> For example, a requirement like this: >> >> """The Foo header MUST contain the "bar" directive""" >> >> is ambiguous; it doesn't specify who has to do what. Rather, >> >> """Senders MUST include the "bar" directive when producing the Foo header; >> recipients that receive a Foo header without a "bar" directive MUST ...""" >> >> is unambiguous (assuming that the spec defines the terms "sender" and >> "recipient"). > > +1.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
