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

Re: Proposed Resolution to PROT I-D Issues List

On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:06:15PM -0800, McDonald, Ira wrote:
 
> I've been having a long, fruitless offline discussion with Joel
> Halpern about this.  The results may be summarized as follows:
> 
> (1) The IESG policy is that the plaintext English is always 
>     normative.
> 
> (2) The IESG policy does NOT allow an appendix of XSD (or any
>     other relatively formal language) to override the plaintext
>     English, because then _parts_ of plaintext English sentences
>     or paragraphs might become invalid.
> 
> I'm strongly opposed to this logic, because it implies that an RFC
> should not include any formal language appendices, since they're
> to be ignored anyway.

Perhaps the conclusion is to remove all English plaintext and then
we can publish normative formal notations. Perhaps this is the real 
explanation why MIB modules like to hide the English text inside of 
DESCRIPTION clauses. ;-)

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>