SM writes: > >RFCs must be shown to work in practice before they become Proposed > >Standards. Ie, don't expect something to work until you see it. > > This is a nit. There isn't any requirement that RFCs have to be > shown to work in practice before they become Proposed Standards.
Don't you have that backwards? It's pointing out lack of a formal hard requirement that is nit-picking. After all, Postel's Principle isn't written in any IETF procedure manual. Would you call that one a "nit", too? _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
