From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:51:33 CDT
Charles Lindsey wrote:
> In <3D939097.7050509@alex.blilly.com> Bruce Lilly <blilly@erols.com> writes:
>
>
>
>>Charles Lindsey wrote:
>>
>>>In <3D8F950C.5050500@alex.blilly.com> Bruce Lilly <blilly@erols.com> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Starting from some baseline, the steps might be:
>>>
>>>
>>>>1. MUST NOT generate, SHOULD accept (no damage caused, prepare
>>>> for generation in next release)
>>>>2. SHOULD NOT generate, MUST accept (notice to developers that
>>>> full implementation is imminent)
>>>>3. MAY generate, MUST accept (full implementation)
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't see why it should take three steps. Why is step 1 necessary?
>
>
>>For interoperability, which cannot be expected if some
>>software generates something corresponding new syntax before
>>other developers have had a chance to prepare receivers for
>>that syntax. The "SHOULD accept" notifies the latter to
>>prepare to receive, while the "MUST NOT generate" prevents
>>problems during the transition period.
>
>
> A "SHOULD NOT generate" is adequate for that purpose.
<reference to flame war snipped>
No it is not..
> Essentially it means that you use it at your own risk.
No, it means exactly what it says, and not what you
choose it to mean (which seems to change rather frequently).
In any event, the risks associated with generating new
syntax before an adequate transition period apply to the
recipient as well as the sender. You *do* understand what
"interoperability" means, don't you?
> If you know that
> your message is only going to places that have already upgraded,
Irrelevant to Usenet.
> or if you
> are prepared to have it dropped at whatever percentage of sites you
> believe are still not upgraded, then you generate the new form.
But the vast majority of users aren't the software developers
that will be generating the new syntax, beyond user control.
> In practice, it means that the vast majority of sites continue to generate
> the old form.
Then you do not object to "MUST NOT" since that also means that
the vast majority of sites comply with continued prior practice.