Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>RFC 2119 is intended to govern technical specifications for software
>and communications protocols
which is a situation where precision and clarity are of great importance.
Human-directed law is another such situation. We have debates about the
meaning of the rules all the
On 8/1/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> comex wrote:
> >AMEND RULE 2152 BY CHANGING ALL WORDS IN ALL CAPS TO THEIR NORMAL ENGLISH
> >CAPITALIZATION, THEN AMEND EVERY OTHER RULE BY CHANGING THOSE WORDS IN THE
> >SAME WAY.
>
> No thanks. The capitalised spelling provides a useful distinction
comex wrote:
>AMEND RULE 2152 BY CHANGING ALL WORDS IN ALL CAPS TO THEIR NORMAL ENGLISH
>CAPITALIZATION, THEN AMEND EVERY OTHER RULE BY CHANGING THOSE WORDS IN THE
>SAME WAY.
No thanks. The capitalised spelling provides a useful distinction
between the precisely-defined terms and the ordinary E
On 8/1/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Proto: caps lock
> (AI=2, disinterested)
>
> AMEND RULE 2152 BY CHANGING ALL WORDS IN ALL CAPS TO THEIR NORMAL ENGLISH
> CAPITALIZATION, THEN AMEND EVERY OTHER RULE BY CHANGING THOSE WORDS IN THE
> SAME WAY.
You should also remove the "all caps" refere
Proto: caps lock
(AI=2, disinterested)
AMEND RULE 2152 BY CHANGING ALL WORDS IN ALL CAPS TO THEIR NORMAL ENGLISH
CAPITALIZATION, THEN AMEND EVERY OTHER RULE BY CHANGING THOSE WORDS IN THE
SAME WAY.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
5 matches
Mail list logo