[Standards] RFC 2119 boilerplate in XEPs

Florian Schmaus flo at geekplace.eu
Tue Dec 8 09:10:35 UTC 2020

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 <xmpp at larma.de 
> <mailto:xmpp at 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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20201208/fadfbdd0/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list