Re: Niggles in usepro-draft-11

On 26 Sep 2008, at 05:06, Russ Allbery wrote:

>
> "Charles Lindsey" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>> How about this:
>>
>>>     <section anchor="supersedes" title="The Supersedes Header  
>>> Field">
>>>       <t>The presence of a Supersedes header field in an article
>>>       requests that the message identifier given in that header  
>>> field be
>>>       withdrawn in exactly the same manner as if it were the target
>>>       of a cancel control message.  Accordingly, news servers SHOULD
>>>       apply to a Supersedes header field the same authentication and
>>>       authorization checks as they would apply to cancel control
>>>       messages.  If the Supersedes header field is honored, the news
>>>       server SHOULD take the same actions as it would take when  
>>> honoring
>>>       a cancel control message for the given target article.</t>
>>
>>> I think inverting the sentence makes it clearer.
>>
>> Yes, but I would still like to see the word "whatever" in there
>> somewhere, just to make it clear that there might well be no checks  
>> on
>> cancel messages (and hence no action applicable to Supersedes).  
>> That is,
>> in fact, the common current practice, much as we might wish otherwise
>> :-( .
>
> Does "the same authentication and authorization checks as they would
> apply" versus "whatever authentication and authorization checks they  
> would
> apply" feel different in meaning to you?  That shading of meaning is  
> too
> fine for me to detect, and the word "whatever" seems less formal and
> precise, which is why I used the former wording.
>
> "The same" to me includes the possibility of "none."


:-) I have occasionally similar arguments with my wife regarding word  
usage, which is when she generally reminds me that I've been a  
computer programmer for too long, and I usually realise she's right.

"the same checks" does definitely have a small difference in  
implication to "whatever checks".  "the same checks" has a slightly  
stronger implication that there is at least one check.  It's not a  
hugely stronger implication, no.  And it is just in implication,  
rather than in explicit meaning.

However, I think that that is not a bad implication to have, and you  
are certainly correct that "the same" includes the possibility of  
"none".

Certainly implementors of news software (the target audience for this)  
should already understand that possibility. :-)

-- 
<a href="http://tertius.net.au/~thorfinn/">[email protected]</a>
The world is coming to an end.  Please log off.  -- BSD fortune file