On 12/8/20 9:40 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
Sorry, I completely missed this for some reason.On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 at 15:30, Marvin W <x...@larma.de <mailto:x...@larma.de>> wrote:> Anyway, I understand what you're trying to do here at a high level, I > just think it's broadly not going to be useful, and certainly isn't an > interoperability concern.I'm happy to change respective wording from uppercase to lowercase to ensure it's not perceived as an RFC2119 keyword. Well, now, that's an entirely new can of worms.There's been some confusion over whether lower-cased "should" counts as RFC 2119. A handful of people in the IETF thought it did, or at least might, and so there was another BCP created to say that only upper-cased SHOULD counts. The XSF hasn't been able to adopt this because it is thought by some that existing XEPs might use a lower-cased "should" in the sense of RFC 2119's SHOULD.The RFC 2119 reference is part of our generalised boilerplate, so we have to switch wholesale, which means isolating each instance of a case-insensitive RFC 2119 keyword and "fixing" it first.
I do not think it is necessarily true that we "have to switch wholesale". We could introduce a new revision of the boilerplate text, which refers to RFC 8174, that is used by new XEPs, while the existing XEPs continue to refer solely RFC 2119. Or am I missing something?
- Florian
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
