Re: WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL60] Forward reference style

I have no problem at all with the way parameters are currently dealt with in the document. It is common usage - keep it as it is.

Philip

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Erik Guttman" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 11:05 PM
Subject: WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL60] Forward reference style


> 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.
> 
> [LL60]
> 
> Description of Issue: Forward reference style
> 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: 1.2
> Rationale/Explanation:
> Lengthy Description:
> 
> [Stuart]
> 
> >    When ready to begin probing, the host should then wait for a random
> >    time interval selected uniformly in the range PROBE_MIN to PROBE_MAX
> >    seconds, and should then send NUM_PROBES probe packets, spaced
> >    randomly, PROBE_MIN to PROBE_MAX seconds apart.
> 
> PROBE_MIN and PROBE_MAX suddenly appear, without mention. Can we give
> their values FIRST, so the reader has a clue what we're talking about.
> 
> [Erik]
> 
> This is standard practice in all RFCs that include constants.  We could
> add text to section 1.2 if you think that this is confusing to
> implementors.
> 
> Personally I feel this goes without saying and adding it would only be a
> matter of (questionable) style.
> 
> [Stuart]
> 
> I disagee.
> 
> What is the harm in helping the reader understand the document better?
> 
> How can unexplained forward references be good style?
> 
> 
> Requested Change:
> 
> Add to section 1.2
> 
>    Constants are introduced in all capital letters.  Their values are
>    given in Section 9.
> 
>