WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL52] Text surrounding RFC 2119 clause is poor

Please post discussion of this issue to the mailing list over the 
next two weeks
ending May 18, 2004.  In order to accept this issued, we will need a strong WG
consensus given that this is very late in the process.

Please see http://www.drizzle.org/~aboba/ZEROCONF/issues.html for a list of
current issues and their status.

[LL52]

Description of Issue:		Text surrounding RFC 2119 clause is poor
Submitter Name:		Stuart Cheshire
Submitter Email Address:	[email protected]
Date first submitted:		04 May 04
Reference:
Comment Type ['t'ech|'e'dit]:	e
Prio ['S' Must|1 should|2 may]:	1
Section:			1.1
Rationale/Explanation:
Lengthy Description:

>    In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
>    of the specification.  These words are often capitalized.

[Stuart]
*Often* capitalized? What does that mean? What does it mean if MUST is
capitalized? What does it mean if it is not capitalized?

[Erik]
This is the standard text which goes out with literally every RFC.

[Stuart]
I disagee.

The draft-07 version *was* the standard text. This is not.

Just reading it, it makes no sense.

It's the wrong paragraph extracted from RFC 2119, out of context, such
that it has no sensible meaning.

[Erik]

RFC 2119 includes the text in the abstract.  A quick skim of
a dozen standards track RFCs show that they do not include the
text you are objecting to, only the legalistic reference to the
reserved upper case words.

Requested Change:

Omit the unnecessary text before "The key words ..."

Was:
1.1.  Requirements

    In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
    of the specification.  These words are often capitalized.  The key
    words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD",
    "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document
    are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

Becomes:
1.1.  Requirements

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", i
    "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
    document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].