[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CAP-12 - interm version 'A'
Doug claimed on 09/05/2003 04:00:23 PM:
> > Then how come not all text was changed like this?
> Not done.
They why did you release CAP-12 and
CAP-12-a if that change was not done?
> > rules. After all, _that_ RFC uses
2 spaces after a period...
> 1) A draft does not obsolete an RFC until it is released.
If you actualy read RFC 2223 then you'd
see that it uses 2 spaces after a period, just like normal English. Guess
you ignored that and misinterpreted that 1 line in the guidelines you cite.
Had RFC 2223 meant for a single space to be used, _it_ would have
> 2) It does look as if that is the new direction.
The only new direction I see is your
change. The RFC editors are working to make it clearer I think by
replacing that 1 line in RFC 2223 with the paragraph that expressly says
how spacing should be.
> 3) The draft is at -07 (not -06).
And did that paragraph get removed between
-06 and -07?..
So if the RFCs after 2223 have 2 spaces
AND RFC 2223 uses 2 spaces after a period AND the new draft "Instructions
for RFC Authors" guidelines the editorspoint you to (from http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html)
(7) Spaces at the End of
When a sentence ended by a period is
immediately followed by
another sentence, there should be two
blank spaces after the
period. This rule provides clarity
when an RFC is displayed
or printed with a fixed-width font.
I think our draft should follow their
guidelines use 2 spaces after a period.
It would make for a smaller diff than
707 changes so finding actual content changes would be easier for everyone.
Unless you dont want folks to be able to easily find the changes...
Messaging & Collaboration
IBM Software Group
FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...