

RFC 2119

From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 14:24:40 -0800
Message-Id: <p0510030bb8a850d02a00@[]>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Dear QAWG,

I'm afraid I was less than coherent at the QA FTF. From RFC 2119 [1]:

    6. Guidance in the use of these Imperatives

    actually required for interoperation or to limit behavior which has
    potential for causing harm (e.g., limiting retransmisssions)  For
    on implementors where the method is not required for

So I wondered if our specification authors are being asked to use these
key words _only_ for "interoperation" or to limit the "potential for
causing harm." The RFC gives them so much force that they might look
attractive for other reasons (such as simply wanting an implementer to
do what one hopes). Kirill replied at your meeting that QA has
"priorities," but I would like to be certain RFC 2119 is used cleanly.

Thank you for the opportunity to observe your group.

[1] http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

mailto:lesch@w3.org               tel:+1.858.483.4819
Received on Sunday, 3 March 2002 17:24:42 GMT
