From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Apr 7 08:46:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9702F1293D6 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:46:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qdMvEQnNJ5ju for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:46:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D37C4128959 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:46:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169E0B80EAB; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:45:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C095AB80EAB for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:45:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KLPGOiSELL6g for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DAB9B80EAA for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.173] (142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id v37Fjt6E051696 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:45:57 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176] claimed to be [10.32.60.173] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "RFC Interest" Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 08:46:14 -0700 Message-ID: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347) Subject: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" From RFC 7322: . . . Where the RFC Editor may suggest changes in wording for clarity and readability, it is up to the author, working group, or stream-approving body to determine whether the changes have an impact on the technical meaning of the document [RFC4844]. . . . It is a list of abbreviations appearing in RFCs and sometimes reflects discussions with authors, Working Group Chairs, and/or Area Directors (ADs). From https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt: WG *- Working Group From the directory of all RFCs: # grep "working group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l 587 # grep "Working Group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l 379 I prefer "Working Group" to "working group". Regardless, we should probably pick one. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sat Apr 8 14:37:11 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07DC127419 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.99 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.99 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M3o5-uAteoz7 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2702412422F for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FECFB80DE1; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9172B80DE1 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9P0TcETCsMrH for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80979B80DE0 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:37:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id b187so117001185oif.0 for ; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 14:37:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CoMvCgEyKj+7euWiV96spUbBPHC0R3RA3UGbiZi/NPQ=; b=El6boJSwaZUYf97avqvU/TDjpUPl0gYJWsLIFMoBwNU+jEFg0i/woPixaDXmwR5o+y LmC80mzibsr3j1rDVUs9+plZ0S90MEp9NI8z0GjUv+ZigGW8eY/PzZvnhetA/XIZ2VLG p0mfNb4u4WCzKkthmdrE+UnMxw+KgV1SmHTcDg2qav7WKh5R1aG/tf5r1mx55dp1HH77 sypwJdsQAwKj3erdHP6t2pGg3QyC2rXO3ICw6pEAmHa7krGCAdOdVbbUzGhxD87EtRYR ZLcrkJV0CLp5DPzMaIobeOiYGzaWHrsXm65X23+H8AIpMhAjsfyKC/7z4Fg+15GoaGmJ +cKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CoMvCgEyKj+7euWiV96spUbBPHC0R3RA3UGbiZi/NPQ=; b=edyRrqqkkm75irGMdTVo9rhhKttFUudR/XKIHwc2ol2ropK+kqBkHKvqVY+w9Cg9Ga VlYki6ea+ad3QXY7PzDbxiwyWqNumgQN8lcmrbPIJDMagYjq+g36i5uX+11BNRqSJRoL 1msfGE/g2MdvhmJ2+Bni4K2LQRy7GktIiLRUKYzPo1dOo8lPk2nM01lMXsW8G7ikbIE0 6dHr9bSnVuDICtC+LRk/3IYQCapp/r6UVK5Mo86aKZ/xL7GT82dV6xzyICJszEwKmrj/ rKT/rm4ID+bGxmWMLalMxvqBlbEJd7A3ohuVcEkIEFPSQnj/w+J6o0WqovAIpu0UfDLD MHhg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0D2BPeWUSuR1hzwwDlLY/GFuAMcAHmMon36/wuiJ44NjxJ5f4AgKuMpwrPMrveS/dpW/8AOty/K1HX9Q== X-Received: by 10.157.16.65 with SMTP id o1mr24637992oto.209.1491687423023; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 14:37:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.231.201 with HTTP; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 14:36:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 17:36:42 -0400 Message-ID: To: Paul Hoffman Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: RFC Interest Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6363304955130008282==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============6363304955130008282== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11409d80f72280054cae8ace --001a11409d80f72280054cae8ace Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul, I also prefer =E2=80=9CWorking Group=E2=80=9D, and agree that we should pic= k one and be consistent going forward. The exception, I guess, would be if the RFC was discussing something other than an IETF Working Group, but that seems unlikely. Cheers, Andy On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote= : > From RFC 7322: > > . . . > Where the RFC Editor may suggest > changes in wording for clarity and readability, it is up to the > author, working group, or stream-approving body to determine whether > the changes have an impact on the technical meaning of the document > [RFC4844]. > . . . > It is a list of abbreviations appearing in RFCs and > sometimes reflects discussions with authors, Working Group Chairs, > and/or Area Directors (ADs). > > From https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt: > > WG *- Working Group > > From the directory of all RFCs: > > # grep "working group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l > 587 > # grep "Working Group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l > 379 > > I prefer "Working Group" to "working group". Regardless, we should > probably pick one. > > --Paul Hoffman > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > --001a11409d80f72280054cae8ace Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Paul,

I also prefer =E2=80=9CWorking Gr= oup=E2=80=9D, and agree that we should pick one and be consistent going for= ward. The exception, I guess, would be if the RFC was discussing something = other than an IETF Working Group, but that seems unlikely.

Cheers,
Andy


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:46 AM, P= aul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
From RFC 7322:

. . .
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Where the RFC Editor may suggest
=C2=A0 =C2=A0changes in wording for clarity and readability, it is up to th= e
=C2=A0 =C2=A0author, working group, or stream-approving body to determine w= hether
=C2=A0 =C2=A0the changes have an impact on the technical meaning of the doc= ument
=C2=A0 =C2=A0[RFC4844].
. . .
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 It is a list of abbreviations appearing in RFCs and =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sometimes reflects discussions with authors, Working G= roup Chairs,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and/or Area Directors (ADs).

>From https://www.rfc-editor.org/materi= als/abbrev.expansion.txt:

WG=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 *- Working Group

>From the directory of all RFCs:

# grep "working group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0587
# grep "Working Group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0379

I prefer "Working Group" to "working group". Regardless= , we should probably pick one.

--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-intere= st@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/list= info/rfc-interest

--001a11409d80f72280054cae8ace-- --===============6363304955130008282== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============6363304955130008282==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sat Apr 8 18:55:03 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD671287A7 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:55:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gvvMIFR3yjVs for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:55:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50CD512878D for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:55:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B77B81208; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:55:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5005B81207 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:54:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YGnlmCRB3gBx for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:54:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBD73B811F8 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:54:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.200.233.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 75C3218014F3 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 03:54:51 +0200 (CEST) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:54:42 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Folks, Isn't there are difference between e.g. "...the MPLS Working Group..." and "...a working group in the IETF..."?? /Loa On 2017-04-09 05:36, Andrew G. Malis wrote: > Paul, > > I also prefer =93Working Group=94, and agree that we should pick one and = be > consistent going forward. The exception, I guess, would be if the RFC > was discussing something other than an IETF Working Group, but that > seems unlikely. > > Cheers, > Andy > > > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Paul Hoffman > wrote: > > From RFC 7322: > > . . . > Where the RFC Editor may suggest > changes in wording for clarity and readability, it is up to the > author, working group, or stream-approving body to determine wheth= er > the changes have an impact on the technical meaning of the document > [RFC4844]. > . . . > It is a list of abbreviations appearing in RFCs and > sometimes reflects discussions with authors, Working Group Chai= rs, > and/or Area Directors (ADs). > > From https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt > : > > WG *- Working Group > > From the directory of all RFCs: > > # grep "working group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l > 587 > # grep "Working Group" rfc7???.txt | wc -l > 379 > > I prefer "Working Group" to "working group". Regardless, we should > probably pick one. > > --Paul Hoffman > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > -- = Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sun Apr 9 09:27:26 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26CBE124B0A for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MdNV54qo_iRC for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DB451241FC for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64018B80D21; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 937E5B80D21 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nGSp3Sf8_Eut for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 749CDB80D20 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.60.70] (142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id v39GQtMA029738 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:26:56 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176] claimed to be [10.32.60.70] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Loa Andersson" Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2017 09:27:16 -0700 Message-ID: <677B4DDE-3B80-49E7-8206-C1E69B509781@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 8 Apr 2017, at 18:54, Loa Andersson wrote: > Isn't there are difference between e.g. "...the MPLS Working Group..." > and "...a working group in the IETF..."?? Maybe. (I say that in seriousness.) For some nouns, you capitalize them when used in a name but don't when they are descriptive; for other nouns, you do both. It's a judgement call, and I trust the RFC Editor to make that call and to get the editing team to enforce it. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sun Apr 9 16:10:47 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA0B12751F for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=dcrocker.net Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7LhJeBhJ1Q5s for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11C861267BB for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572A2B80E41; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01427B80E41 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dcrocker.net Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aAhiFI5H_47I for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67308B80E40 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v39NCiPj031204 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:12:46 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1491779566; bh=To74cjfxNCz7gjhMzuAtiL3rdZ+ZeumUvUFZh1SazbA=; h=Subject:To:References:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=XOES00wFUkhp8hsROszZ2zJd2xNDF+puqOFjV0+92oC2kVeH4tVoL67gD8G4Du8PH 4/zMccyT5dJdkzXIScRz2znf1usD0EUxsEw2nKIz81AvhF1tLjiqz5b4hNfAcpDeLl 2xWbyOlq1K21Q4KxZwf4suQMS3JbXQhRDzIO5cKk= To: Loa Andersson , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> From: Dave Crocker Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking Message-ID: Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:10:25 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 4/8/2017 6:54 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > > Isn't there are difference between e.g. "...the MPLS Working Group..." > and "...a working group in the IETF..."?? Exactly. When the term is used as a reference to of a specific effort -- essentially serving as a name, such as "the Working Group" -- then capitalization makes sense. When the term is used generically -- eg, 'a working group' -- it doesn't make sense to capitalize it. d/ ps. Any correlation this assessment has to THE Internet vs. AN internet is entirely intentional. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sun Apr 9 17:12:34 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F38291241FC for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=me.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WXsFXMG25Z_0 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A23401250B8 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4694B8103F; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF01B8103F for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=me.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o_msRJzoomC8 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com (mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com [17.110.69.254]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CFC8B8103D for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 17:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com by mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) id <0OO600M002IR3V00@mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com> for rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 00:12:23 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=me.com; s=4d515a; t=1491783143; bh=FLO7Zp83sB2dj6R6d6OGAPTwfJsNvz/vsI8wPDPycQM=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-id:MIME-version:Content-type; b=izXNYvlfkqzbRlNr/naihzDUQhB8FUGesTsNnS9UinuTmF6EfQcrSvyh3jacTzVuR Vptl3l0Dzxwk/6a4KPe9ZWhZDKN3LvSLRxxINecPl1gDIyPQVEDN1CgPi/FMkK/6zR 4Dzsb5AePF5mlnb2ZjFFKZOMdlM4tqR6G0qPLEgbP6FmROYzViglROhUGkbBPCwKUx rupKIuZ4noSz6JWs8dXOaPxqSqCHMpKlQwNhzTNGLkFIiJ/yx0EaQzTMcAfBl32hJL XvFV839cPJO7QY85CuusTcOifGcp2Isnq4IpDq3jweWf2Wh7Nu0nmoCK2Xwe92udZw LqHzYYSbdq1WA== Received: from icloud.com ([127.0.0.1]) by mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) with ESMTPSA id <0OO600GR538KPI30@mr11p00im-asmtp003.me.com>; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 00:12:21 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-04-09_14:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1034 suspectscore=1 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1701120000 definitions=main-1704100000 Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2017 17:12:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Ole Jacobsen To: dcrocker@bbiw.net In-reply-to: Message-id: References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (OSX 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On Sun, 9 Apr 2017, Dave Crocker wrote: > > When the term is used as a reference to of a specific effort -- essentially > serving as a name, such as "the Working Group" -- then capitalization makes > sense. > > When the term is used generically -- eg, 'a working group' -- it doesn't make > sense to capitalize it. > > > d/ I think that depends on whether or not we consider "Working Group" to be an IETF "term of art" in which case I would always capitalize it. Ole _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 11 16:25:58 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E54B126DEE for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G_oDDLpoKPh1 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEFEF126C22 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6EB9B8114C; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BDDFB8114C for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZMgQvUujpedc for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com (mail-wm0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BE00B8114B for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id u2so11695177wmu.0 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=5n/zZIG0/ckQUS5dYqF7wJP4DJ9WyxTo/cxHpZMSQy4=; b=ZdrBzf+NLMUCx8qOpSosccOm6XJF0Vcfp4tIxRkMCmLyj3i5NiXKl97QaRRje0oHsy 2c6l5Gm51EXVoyi6bH8P1DMKVTyxuJ+zllTUwBV93ECtguJYTBasKryol+f3Y92HwTj2 ufKu9VxD18okc6VhIdn/PfdSM4v3yzu4GMQfQUJfSqh6vGXENRXuTa+13OiZ2RAPaS6N 4oHaYBEvlW3Id2HcA77y8o8ZQizq+9PIVJRRuY77e3kIq47w7iqCiUohSquqXH64DNV5 Hij5ZRcsl4BNNNjRHhL/T/Su7IpSHDnZGEsdbVV6JxCB44aMCGJp5TasW1M+kw/VkDNB PkaA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=5n/zZIG0/ckQUS5dYqF7wJP4DJ9WyxTo/cxHpZMSQy4=; b=Zb+EIeH2FgS+nGycUKsMoEh5TPlpUo3LR4PaLK0RhRh+DLuTKUBRUNu2KxfkdkxXay JqnUbWyywFvX+VFOdOJeeeDVji+fZUwhKjBteXCIt1tKlrsfjUa71FM9UsY+FjU+r0d5 hSkZurIBF05Wf0qzP9rmUZivfQVnZTHkqUT8n7DtwORK7pCangALPVtrllzinRAqV7fz lbN6/2m8Nm4ZKDCHAdOZ7YEMKkZZqT3Onn+8YCb1xSSt9JrJNfD3SEDiRzapp1c2h+gH +Kl8tWKtVHDCsN0Ih1j5jAp/v9uWEGhDbDyOkeFSocxs/n/O2Jg7OpHhAjT75+2mmOlt 2omQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7JhQukYC6w3it7+Vz9NlbBYPpYHDCnXZS0mSEImehRZ2pahLHp 8kzg5yocrcKG5g== X-Received: by 10.28.141.81 with SMTP id p78mr17381606wmd.123.1491953147049; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4d01:db10:d5e8:9f33:187d:11c9? ([2601:647:4d01:db10:d5e8:9f33:187d:11c9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s27sm23375614wra.69.2017.04.11.16.25.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9108968933905499399==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============9108968933905499399== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_86CC1F0B-EFED-403E-B279-6BF4B264F7B2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_86CC1F0B-EFED-403E-B279-6BF4B264F7B2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I can=E2=80=99t help to respond to this thread, who cares. Do we really need to define rules for things as arcane as if =E2=80=9Cwork= ing group=E2=80=9D should be capitalized? I see no difference between working group Working Group 6MAN working group 6MAN Working Group As I said, who cares. Bob --Apple-Mail=_86CC1F0B-EFED-403E-B279-6BF4B264F7B2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJY7WX0AAoJEK7rdBF357uo3rIH/0ORQG7JxPhcNb3F6Ek/Ppss k0dY7AzLDV/jHJSHnOCJavWxZwl+f4+/VL4Mr3AU3RTmizyAT057lX8NEDyUFnM/ K8Xy0urdJgvYuhcW5MwxFNh0Udu2OUcmoLDUSFZ6JkWQQdEQ3c/22y4qaRD+OF6u NV5X/VUqrK8pu7xMI1ft79esIpCdKVr+Ni2gnNVoohe7NdEFU6XJZcREmi5tRmJW 3ZUHexMtsOhk07qhDaC+TM41WfkNkHW2Dk69oafua54/ZhMdZXt5FjKZK8Dz5HU6 r9Jmuj3LSlZcdXKPLzJEKMGn9buMz1hy1Gws255336tnDJN5T2c7+Jb11tnfiZo= =/TZq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_86CC1F0B-EFED-403E-B279-6BF4B264F7B2-- --===============9108968933905499399== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============9108968933905499399==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 11 16:48:51 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB90126C7A for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OshLW5haTlvB for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0F9E127097 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E09EB812F6; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1471DB812F6 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R56mahIbbo4Q for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8021AB812F4 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [169.254.103.43] (142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id v3BNmPdI024305 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:26 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176] claimed to be [169.254.103.43] From: "Paul Hoffman" To: "Bob Hinden" Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:48:39 -0700 Message-ID: <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gMTEgQXByIDIwMTcsIGF0IDE2OjI1LCBCb2IgSGluZGVuIHdyb3RlOgoKPiBJIGNhbuKAmXQg aGVscCB0byByZXNwb25kIHRvIHRoaXMgdGhyZWFkLCB3aG8gY2FyZXMuCgpNYW55IHBlb3BsZSwg cGFydGljdWxhcmx5IG5vbi1uYXRpdmUgc3BlYWtlcnMgb2YgRW5nbGlzaCwgY2FyZS4gVGhleSAK ZG9uJ3Qgd2FudCB0byBsb29rIGZvb2xpc2ggaWYgdGhleSBwaWNrIHRoZSB3cm9uZyBjYXBpdGFs aXphdGlvbi4KCi0tUGF1bCBIb2ZmbWFuCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJm Yy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v cmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 11 17:15:46 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3C3126BF7 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q-EyyMdwGv-k for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3F16120326 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956B7B81BD1; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B815B81BD1 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ImUzBq047KSX for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com (mail-wm0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7110AB81BD0 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id o81so75268501wmb.1 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=gi4h25e3OZOxKDIBN0Go4Cgt3/c8m2R/A24PSIkovDg=; b=IolvkOrul2A2EewHcHsEpEDtjuqddrkxcL/rvo6kTAF0+1AOAONSBXBeHrz29ovtq3 ey88+6tPrc7KFgnND/5uPIZs+rnJhIqQPkn3GLCPsC3qu4jV9weGFqJk9rA1pfS3zAP8 fwRRD7Hbl8svHajaeQMtgR6nhzjTQ0dmZuvl3JhF3OSfaaOrP9dHDCrh7xeZqntBt/m8 WWnCwW6vDF6HKyJ7u+UQQnzRQ2kBS9AMmLv3YOJ1Uc2w3W0rMYrJrvlYY1o47rx9dZtX PmvrF+1lSJ8lUYniCLnDfauL5ry7Uo0yxrtUdY+rXaOi8Zw9B3lsIuQ39iZ+nO8Pk/B0 KYRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=gi4h25e3OZOxKDIBN0Go4Cgt3/c8m2R/A24PSIkovDg=; b=pU9inU3X3DYOlz7ll91j/RPSDPu2LQPgnxtlOB6kwerSoU+Ks/dtVITXlthD/06T5j 46mheszKzlVshYrab76l9DeNslOFN4ffYWhVFkP0K5agvO5BVdrKKLLzd3ZOX3deRNGC ebvoMqmu9Ra46CTT6IGtg2VK+CxECDWW63CPD5LYWKbOaac/MruHQKk/sE0qX6ufwHm9 JzkUqjGLB5J7Qm2lCbTpQvNO8UN/RbzKAuMp/e4vhQEHkNolkiVLex3PPM4Y+pI46XxU d8GcD/0/VcR1m1UoZEHmqtIUicAKqB0wpZlLhdLmrvQtMxfpDW9N+CdGE0iqCLHzN7Gq XguQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6nVBkntDuYnBGESS/AvYFdRY1/r5o6Ifqj6nl60jqNRMB2Ux/h hKLYsBBZKn06Zg== X-Received: by 10.28.128.197 with SMTP id b188mr16426825wmd.115.1491956136339; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4d01:db10:d5e8:9f33:187d:11c9? ([2601:647:4d01:db10:d5e8:9f33:187d:11c9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y72sm11853983wrc.51.2017.04.11.17.15.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:15:28 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> To: Paul Hoffman References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1477976464726699743==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============1477976464726699743== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AC474901-22D1-46D5-B643-446DEC474149"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_AC474901-22D1-46D5-B643-446DEC474149 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Apr 11, 2017, at 4:48 PM, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >=20 > On 11 Apr 2017, at 16:25, Bob Hinden wrote: >=20 >> I can=E2=80=99t help to respond to this thread, who cares. >=20 > Many people, particularly non-native speakers of English, care. They = don't want to look foolish if they pick the wrong capitalization. Sorry, but I don=E2=80=99t think there is a =E2=80=9Cwrong = capitalization=E2=80=9D in this case. Bob --Apple-Mail=_AC474901-22D1-46D5-B643-446DEC474149 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJY7XGhAAoJEK7rdBF357uoscsH/i0r6AdzhxAJaUNujuF8mF94 qKuwPTOJJS+jaHIGdLwxnLmMZGbQ30Bls3y1pK2UFExYIW3Rj49mei0WMBOo5geb d+zK8CwgyI9xzmGOCdQJQxsbtNkj0mnQGCVH2XImGbxek0tbGJ0S5Xt61yRao9Zf SIQAxp/ohY2PllIHWBnRyS/5/XqA3oGMyRV5wjDNysf+4SdtAwj3sTxbEYpS7sAr AYYTzfzfQIXzy1mYV/llMvIjemgRR7r+6l2efi9XBK2wD7kgknnLFPImi1EVoqzx Rloj1GdrIiwW/XpMKAMCEoGxA6PezUnBFIDeH1cmsq4TU2so5UicEfiP1MJvaqE= =G96j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_AC474901-22D1-46D5-B643-446DEC474149-- --===============1477976464726699743== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============1477976464726699743==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 11 17:53:17 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B50128B91 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.181 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.181 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cKrTecTh9vi3 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB32C128B51 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A549B81C49; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A629B81C49 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3bv-1auRB-LB for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89109B81C47 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v3C0injP021399 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:53:07 -0400 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29s7wxbnar-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:53:07 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v3C0r6wB019165 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:53:06 -0400 Received: from mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.241]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v3C0qxfk019089 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:53:00 -0400 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAA.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.145]) by mlpi409.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:52:45 GMT Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCG.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.7.103]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.145]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:52:45 -0400 From: "HANSEN, TONY L" CC: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Thread-Topic: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" Thread-Index: AQHSsxr+SmHqr0cTb0+1BFtBwXWKg6HBGSGAgAAHfgD//8dbAA== Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:52:44 +0000 Message-ID: <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.110.240.169] Content-ID: <441097C86C2C8342B140B40C249F663E@LOCAL> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-04-11_19:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1704120005 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gNC8xMS8xNywgODoxNSBQTSwgInJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdCBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgQm9iIEhpbmRl biIgPHJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdC1ib3VuY2VzQHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBib2Iu aGluZGVuQGdtYWlsLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCiAgICANCiAgICA+IE9uIEFwciAxMSwgMjAxNywg YXQgNDo0OCBQTSwgUGF1bCBIb2ZmbWFuIDxwYXVsLmhvZmZtYW5AdnBuYy5vcmc+IHdyb3RlOg0K ICAgID4gDQogICAgPiBPbiAxMSBBcHIgMjAxNywgYXQgMTY6MjUsIEJvYiBIaW5kZW4gd3JvdGU6 DQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+PiBJIGNhbuKAmXQgaGVscCB0byByZXNwb25kIHRvIHRoaXMgdGhyZWFk LCB3aG8gY2FyZXMuDQogICAgPiANCiAgICA+IE1hbnkgcGVvcGxlLCBwYXJ0aWN1bGFybHkgbm9u LW5hdGl2ZSBzcGVha2VycyBvZiBFbmdsaXNoLCBjYXJlLiBUaGV5IGRvbid0IHdhbnQgdG8gbG9v ayBmb29saXNoIGlmIHRoZXkgcGljayB0aGUgd3JvbmcgY2FwaXRhbGl6YXRpb24uDQogICAgDQog ICAgU29ycnksIGJ1dCBJIGRvbuKAmXQgdGhpbmsgdGhlcmUgaXMgYSDigJx3cm9uZyBjYXBpdGFs aXphdGlvbuKAnSBpbiB0aGlzIGNhc2UuDQoNCg0KSSBhZ3JlZTsgYW55IGNhcGl0YWxpemF0aW9u IHdpbGwgYmUgYSBtYXR0ZXIgb2YgcGVyY2VpdmVkIGNvbnZlbnRpb24sIGFuZCBuZWl0aGVyIGlz IHdyb25nLg0KDQpJIHRoaW5rIERhdmXigJlzIGNoYXJhY3Rlcml6YXRpb24gbWF0Y2hlcyBjbG9z ZXN0IHRvIHdoYXQgSeKAmXZlIG9ic2VydmVkIGluID5tb3N0PCB1c2VzLCBidXQgbm90IGFsbC4N Cg0KCVRvbnkgSGFuc2VuDQogICAgDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJm Yy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v cmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Apr 12 08:14:33 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11B713170F for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AjQw8DznLahS for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5192F131707 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52154B810C3; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6E97B810C3 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11KUx2FmYvot for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A25AB810C2 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id b187so35333515oif.0 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=gNzXBd7CEVt4Q/si2q0ys2niBP4ZITeCBYowfLHKN/U=; b=aL1v3uHQFmME8MyFjK57iepKIoAM0r1pdbpVLwxUFj7yoC0PH6UFP+r8AeR9sv+3B5 aDG4OUwckcJwuUwMBm+9fq4JeVeBFaTQhVZhYcBKBGcDyA4h8S5/638Zz+A/EUH/41l2 2VPqaWcD7m288kPNGlx4vcDKb6c16c/qf0aj/GiHH1I3vSZkCfMsylTPamdvQWIYelnl vOdmScMChenbaRj0efjYJqsAl6aBRD96PK1hAO+gyGbcqP8A22NK/3LJhMpmCFgTZOIb 3buK88QfUU0qvUEUazxERCnWWn6WBSDkf/cRQw+c7YtAktV5esvAQiKq+F9WT4v2xZES BDPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gNzXBd7CEVt4Q/si2q0ys2niBP4ZITeCBYowfLHKN/U=; b=TgCJISWl3UIMfBP0O8tijdScl47CPUNH416aJWX4HUpiVNN02Qo6SctwpjXqItEMxF DahenITPc9FflsJhrZAwmMJqlMIkk+Sjy97tC9ulu2CWWuhH10GxYHOyifP1/UU6L1+J hZVFHo7ppkSG/xx4A25/adp3mMogjJgsliIMWi9NZIke0TqT5rG82pxrmMNRH4nGdtlP mLxi7w2eqp670KXTBBWd5bEL9kRCP5BFF/o6vkwW6Dzsjar7vGl8qoM5bBrOatvh8vfE hBfFeMheXtYAP7kg06AyADSvK2D/0NtgL5dVmEPEEueMdGsTIiuRUcA0gqpqP5wVT86d D7pQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7pEBNeVFXzGvG/QSjY8J8nLUeEWLUtXOyLizou3WuOG7neBgO9M82OHQr63Ftsaw6NxkTN8m/y7C6D6g== X-Received: by 10.157.36.36 with SMTP id p33mr10267555ota.49.1492010064632; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.22.175 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:14:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:14:23 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: shnDEOCsDjZj80Z9xf8t5QHwcf8 Message-ID: To: "HANSEN, TONY L" Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4656758718207492892==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============4656758718207492892== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d02d8e76464054cf9a9c2 --001a113d02d8e76464054cf9a9c2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Capitalization in English has followed John Hart's rule that the first word in a sentence and proper nouns are capitalized since the mid 17th century (Hart died in 1574). The practice was well established long before the beginning of compulsory schooling in Victorian times. I suggest that this is a case where it is unnecessary for the IETF to vary what is already the standard. If we refer to the SPLUNGE Working Group, then 'Working Group' appears as part of its title and is thus a proper noun and is thus capitalized. If we are talking about what a working group is doing then it is not. --001a113d02d8e76464054cf9a9c2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cap= italization in English has followed John Hart's rule that the first wor= d in a sentence and proper nouns are capitalized since the mid 17th century= (Hart died in 1574). The practice was well established long before the beg= inning of compulsory schooling in Victorian times.

I suggest that this is a case where it is unneces= sary for the IETF to vary what is already the standard.

If we refer to the SPLUNGE Working Group, th= en 'Working Group' appears as part of its title and is thus a prope= r noun and is thus capitalized. If we are talking about what a working grou= p is doing then it is not.


--001a113d02d8e76464054cf9a9c2-- --===============4656758718207492892== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============4656758718207492892==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Apr 12 09:53:47 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5E7F1317A0 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.18 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.18 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZK5OMjZtAKKP for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99B4313179F for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86CD8B80101; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5AF2B80101 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T7l2GoqzTx6h for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A925B80100 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.9.184.20] ([128.9.184.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v3CGrF4H013852 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:16 -0700 (PDT) References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" From: Joe Touch Message-ID: Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:53:15 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4719005299894710614==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============4719005299894710614== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------7FC5E2512DB9AFF1B43704EF" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------7FC5E2512DB9AFF1B43704EF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Capitalization rules, like everything else in English, are fluid. Proper nouns aren't all capitalized, e.g.: "You can xerox a kleenex." E.g., the Associated Press has recommended using "internet" rather than "Internet", even for the proper noun of the singular, global communications system we all work on. Many newspapers and other media outlets follow their lead. I don't think it matters what is used. Consistency is helpful, but not critical. Joe On 4/12/2017 8:14 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > Capitalization in English has followed John Hart's rule that the first > word in a sentence and proper nouns are capitalized since the mid 17th > century (Hart died in 1574). The practice was well established long > before the beginning of compulsory schooling in Victorian times. > > I suggest that this is a case where it is unnecessary for the IETF to > vary what is already the standard. > > If we refer to the SPLUNGE Working Group, then 'Working Group' appears > as part of its title and is thus a proper noun and is thus > capitalized. If we are talking about what a working group is doing > then it is not. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --------------7FC5E2512DB9AFF1B43704EF Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Capitalization rules, like everything else in English, are fluid. Proper nouns aren't all capitalized, e.g.: "You can xerox a kleenex."

E.g., the Associated Press has recommended using "internet" rather than "Internet", even for the proper noun of the singular, global communications system we all work on. Many newspapers and other media outlets follow their lead.

I don't think it matters what is used. Consistency is helpful, but not critical.

Joe


On 4/12/2017 8:14 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
Capitalization in English has followed John Hart's rule that the first word in a sentence and proper nouns are capitalized since the mid 17th century (Hart died in 1574). The practice was well established long before the beginning of compulsory schooling in Victorian times.

I suggest that this is a case where it is unnecessary for the IETF to vary what is already the standard.

If we refer to the SPLUNGE Working Group, then 'Working Group' appears as part of its title and is thus a proper noun and is thus capitalized. If we are talking about what a working group is doing then it is not.




_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

--------------7FC5E2512DB9AFF1B43704EF-- --===============4719005299894710614== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============4719005299894710614==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Apr 12 17:11:28 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A157127599 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TQ8c8-9S1GX8 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D7CF126C7B for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD3BB8125B; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAC26B8125B for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aRKBChbdUwR1 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DBD3B8125A for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x229.google.com with SMTP id b187so49884967oif.0 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=FB3bkGWuuCHkhF7OgUFQuoIJVvNep41hp1xTvfzNeT8=; b=qcd6GY09QrRRfNkU84SZ9eUxjNjAupQgGWc1s8xz8Dw09ZhmB6OD/MEOOpNga5UNqG frNatzT9mBTS6l7NRxl7poB1/fUfJA+cxnVaoO3aZv4xfWoDZVkMzswQHbymhHbn4yii LKUhe1J81+riuLKYkS7P/82wpxw4aFOwEDA3Y1K03HqNEkse4p/qYVKhRHuw7Gw86m9l tDZICcF2JqdQ3UPj9XbKhkVUccFXE4SGi34oAwD1OozvFMSzYisAOmYViCERDCdKwton gOY/77KQiMF1qr4/RbUiVkAcsqOP/5mcw+rergh5Hx2ykMFVhszwiwRQGjQcZIIXeFI6 FX/A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FB3bkGWuuCHkhF7OgUFQuoIJVvNep41hp1xTvfzNeT8=; b=ljq50Cmt7hBcm9GFJNLLLE/x6HXQqPAIGbZBJoTIurJ3NxZMUwBAhOUfKGHJjafXpZ KpMu9uUxB3EIjCMxrClcWHykX7dbzQZwAv6wwK8BsjHu2en7D/khW1CdnbBpaxs1Ij6j ufJZwP0j+R2NWEd0mS/2rRL0n35Nanh6n/JhXD3JDy6abkj0RkB5yumTOQxn9uSO0C2n WjEnp+WG/As4pNNKrwuFDxs7vimdMW/amJfV+4yitGKhYNgYLOIwkHbUV5R+5OE4HGkj PTx/bJmKmtfRtaO3TdpqunDv1Ejoojdmjrx3Rxd4IF7ZmvZH98hCwDwDX1h9OFmsxlNK UMJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7LA8Tg8RvKgiya3IzP7Fs/5DKg+jSA9Y0DmusCwsgYbrwqf8t6 uunZH7AOblc1mXdLuZs+Or1CSsOkfQ== X-Received: by 10.157.47.69 with SMTP id h63mr197609otb.89.1492042279178; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.22.175 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:11:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 20:11:18 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6YNSljWVBXaMkleJonosAby9CHM Message-ID: To: Joe Touch Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3093829289411303991==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============3093829289411303991== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c030bf60a5c9b054d012a4e --94eb2c030bf60a5c9b054d012a4e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 If you write xerox, you are using it as a synonym for photocopy and it is thus not a proper noun. Same if you google the Internet. AP are ignorant dolts who don't know better. We do. On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > Capitalization rules, like everything else in English, are fluid. Proper > nouns aren't all capitalized, e.g.: "You can xerox a kleenex." > > E.g., the Associated Press has recommended using "internet" rather than > "Internet", even for the proper noun of the singular, global communications > system we all work on. Many newspapers and other media outlets follow their > lead. > > I don't think it matters what is used. Consistency is helpful, but not > critical. > > Joe > > On 4/12/2017 8:14 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > Capitalization in English has followed John Hart's rule that the first > word in a sentence and proper nouns are capitalized since the mid 17th > century (Hart died in 1574). The practice was well established long before > the beginning of compulsory schooling in Victorian times. > > I suggest that this is a case where it is unnecessary for the IETF to vary > what is already the standard. > > If we refer to the SPLUNGE Working Group, then 'Working Group' appears as > part of its title and is thus a proper noun and is thus capitalized. If we > are talking about what a working group is doing then it is not. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing listrfc-interest@rfc-editor.orghttps://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > > > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > > --94eb2c030bf60a5c9b054d012a4e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If = you write xerox, you are using it as a synonym for photocopy and it is thus= not a proper noun. Same if you google the Internet.

AP are ignorant dolts who don't know better= . We do.


On Wed, Apr 1= 2, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
=20 =20 =20

Capitalization rules, like everything else in English, are fluid. Proper nouns aren't all capitalized, e.g.: "You can xerox a kleenex."

E.g., the Associated Press has recommended using "internet"= ; rather than "Internet", even for the proper noun of the sin= gular, global communications system we all work on. Many newspapers and other media outlets follow their lead.

I don't think it matters what is used. Consistency is helpful, but not critical.

Joe


On 4/12/2017 8:14 = AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
Capitalization in English has followed John Hart's rule that the first word in a sentence and proper nouns are capitalized since the mid 17th century (Hart died in 1574). The practice was well established long before the beginning of compulsory schooling in Victorian times.

I suggest that this is a case where it is unnecessary for the IETF to vary what is already the standard.

If we refer to the SPLUNGE Working Group, then 'Working Group' appear= s as part of its title and is thus a proper noun and is thus capitalized. If we are talking about what a working group is doing then it is not.




______________________________=
_________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org<=
/a>
https://w=
ww.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest


_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org<= /a>
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/list= info/rfc-interest


--94eb2c030bf60a5c9b054d012a4e-- --===============3093829289411303991== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============3093829289411303991==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Apr 12 17:21:12 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516A91270B4 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:21:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w3Vi28OP8xsp for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E343126C7B for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B806CB81283; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:21:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A98EB81283 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:21:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y9z3EIJQH1Fk for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3648AB81282 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.9.184.20] ([128.9.184.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v3D0Kewe024621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:20:41 -0700 (PDT) To: Phillip Hallam-Baker References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> From: Joe Touch Message-ID: <6c82d1b1-2054-2ad9-3397-1876f119b4fa@isi.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:20:40 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2231378509693913906==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============2231378509693913906== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------BA99C6CFC43E341FAF6008DA" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------BA99C6CFC43E341FAF6008DA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 4/12/2017 5:11 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > If you write xerox, you are using it as a synonym for photocopy and it > is thus not a proper noun. Same if you google the Internet. > > AP are ignorant dolts who don't know better. We do. We can know whatever we want, but we don't control English. And we don't enforce IETF protocol requirements, let alone how "Internet" is spelled elsewhere. Just as the AP points off to Webster's New World College dictionary, we should use an existing style guide for such things, IMO. Joe --------------BA99C6CFC43E341FAF6008DA Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



On 4/12/2017 5:11 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
If you write xerox, you are using it as a synonym for photocopy and it is thus not a proper noun. Same if you google the Internet.

AP are ignorant dolts who don't know better. We do.

We can know whatever we want, but we don't control English.

And we don't enforce IETF protocol requirements, let alone how "Internet" is spelled elsewhere.

Just as the AP points off to Webster's New World College dictionary, we should use an existing style guide for such things, IMO.

Joe
--------------BA99C6CFC43E341FAF6008DA-- --===============2231378509693913906== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============2231378509693913906==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Apr 12 18:53:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A541129524 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nXXtDzHaOJ5o for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C85921294F7 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45C7FB8109A; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 290F8B8109A for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7RSYYZrR4n3h for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x22c.google.com (mail-pf0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22c]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A445DB81099 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id i5so21576502pfc.2 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qDUgOy8pSvxjhkXtl93vHwau43eWLIV29j34KZD/3QU=; b=Vm0BdAz4cXVVNLYaqmXmjgyUfRVgqSdbbBTTd4KgLzcoxw5JbFuNt9pFc6draXiEmZ 1orgBR3U24+GwXeia2TE4Bzlgg3JzDinwXP7DfODI1cUs3+oWmBaw9wnJBwsm+lYSsPf j/DAGgBiN/VxJY0QZlxvtjXZ67SSTolNWlkpSGe2E2AetwrxqiQbgkxNcslaptZuB52d l14/K21FADJ/cRCj8lcrgClr+8y8tTqQfAYXzW+zqJ27HfX8c4rVQT0k7EQYD3I0o+NW XXiatarjCUDnfqD/D1fvR0FzVOKE9YR+tJPdZa9HsR+q+5yqjCt3nTWfsrs51rvJc+6s ccjA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qDUgOy8pSvxjhkXtl93vHwau43eWLIV29j34KZD/3QU=; b=I/xA4BVbJgelxmyBg02i4P+IgWXXewazZyG/lua/M7t8WitZAEgdOHMuP977+SsB81 awcszuld20H3iYG025z5VA87Ld8zDBglko08gX/bZUP8G0i3IlEHebxdBV16oC+UYYnA LR82xqR+KavmY0hEq7z42bELJ2vewhnEJppYUXPQVqBBQ0pBQ8J8ZbZR4n8nuQnGWRKy knkGS2mve81Sy/OkgHg2DyYL1h4wuzG97gORPv+2VkVOAuKwI3pCLQpmpZWtFfsj3NcS TSegg9ygs9B1jn7V+Ad1zNUssbn/BcDLfA7wlIj02GqL+Do+RzJnnxbwyvK0APWyg0I7 a1kQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7X6v/hWgPWlivyIBbgRc+e/HqnJKR4h+9cYc6n4uP/dppQYkr/ dk4W11ggfSUp9oTe X-Received: by 10.99.126.19 with SMTP id z19mr724883pgc.51.1492048412679; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.26] ([118.149.111.148]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s10sm21769462pfe.28.2017.04.12.18.53.31 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:53:32 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <54fbdca9-5e46-5864-4310-a75d4a4c254b@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:53:32 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Hmm. I'm wondering whether to capitalize (or capitalise) bike shed? _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 18 10:30:29 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE40212EBD5 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.803 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.803 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nkX0wrqodoiR for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B238129407 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EFBAB81217; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D023B81217 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SUqKCnFrJ5YY for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34D44B81215 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930271C6673 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pnv9LhuGBDB0 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A0E01C370A for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:22 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> <54fbdca9-5e46-5864-4310-a75d4a4c254b@gmail.com> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <5a3d7c49-79af-5252-1441-8b939b75858b@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:30:24 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <54fbdca9-5e46-5864-4310-a75d4a4c254b@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Hello all, Interesting thread. I am sympathetic to how capitalization rules can be confusing to everyone (not just non-native English speakers). That said, I think simply requiring "Working Group" in all instances is not really the right approach for a variety of reasons. For one, it's really not a unique term of art; other SDOs (e.g., IEEE - see https://standards.ieee.org/develop/wg.html) use "working groups" as well. For another, being able to talk about working groups as opposed to, for instance, the Internet Area Working Group, is useful. In this case, the RFC Editor will stick with the CMOS guidelines about capitalization, which summarized say that when used as a proper noun, we will capitalize it. When used as a common noun, we won't. Hope that helps, Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 18 10:48:56 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B70612EB20 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P8tRgla_yeQD for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8785912EB2B for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01292B81294; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40978B81294; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lkiJy9OMFBTR; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22d.google.com (mail-oi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22d]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F8D6B81293; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id x184so293794oia.1; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=CW+0IANwFZEozbwhsWZu24eOizH/rcSJqv5QXgr2gh0=; b=rM1isdTPFwMXK5aRGR6zjAhJtQ0wETX2/FLbcUtbOVtXA9MmR7tWdbwBJeN4dKdFeW BMt3ZWs2KBLYKTBexZRVftBj3MpSHvM9HsHwz4ZmBlivtMm41mTA/1as8DUM5F3pFBv1 OXZjaSSMlSFbpl67rkrYfafq35njV1MfZj4rKMxvfHa5aDxdC0QCGwkjkWtPGvHwlqWQ cZINNQUh4HsX+b/G6kJGrHO/5CR4MfIoz66AUkp2vrRpQ/yMXEUcgG+3qvs74+53XXMm SeJl4DjnjniuRX4dTqSqQE/WUdzFiBtt40aPSY8Wi4aREC8GRGxQY5N51vHY0ZVzO2l2 75eQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CW+0IANwFZEozbwhsWZu24eOizH/rcSJqv5QXgr2gh0=; b=E1x9osRWmGXSsJSNwisuYu0jE3lRn1Kw/sXEkFiKopodigStm8LegBvKFaFVg/DoMJ QffQslSmii7KmR4sMnbcMveXT33FKRwu0nlAqJoZgd+wen4TJ4D/F3nG4QS0buGUCZcP 7/2QTX8q9E2BVJ8rcwEvjLgDMuT5fuIPaF2wiGNWdPWgFVGbHjDsCa0DYuC9yusIEmZD wK8ftWboYlLzo/g97MHnigh+U2WqabTHiq1hUSqCKiQECpoHsBA4vErDiHhlQeE56Ui9 wXaWbBpXZ9j6AEDvtck2uxn3TFZqw7szySHXm9dlEnqcJ+kN2T/M02wJ+XXNMzmNqOca GdwA== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6vHfiGeiOWhsRhnvlX8drlmoGsvJjyDmVzxZHVwGsoPTV8sd1f ZdrXCHCCjMEDg/6aFeZ+paudLRJZCA== X-Received: by 10.157.3.241 with SMTP id f104mr8378258otf.16.1492537730483; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.22.175 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:48:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5a3d7c49-79af-5252-1441-8b939b75858b@rfc-editor.org> References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> <54fbdca9-5e46-5864-4310-a75d4a4c254b@gmail.com> <5a3d7c49-79af-5252-1441-8b939b75858b@rfc-editor.org> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:48:49 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: _s75W0zzmaVlWQUFdQUq5LfpWkI Message-ID: To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0820823582710371281==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============0820823582710371281== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c1185123d4d32054d748508 --94eb2c1185123d4d32054d748508 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 That's cMOS. They use lower case for proper nouns like Internet. On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) < rse@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > Hello all, > > Interesting thread. > > I am sympathetic to how capitalization rules can be confusing to > everyone (not just non-native English speakers). That said, I think > simply requiring "Working Group" in all instances is not really the > right approach for a variety of reasons. For one, it's really not a > unique term of art; other SDOs (e.g., IEEE - see > https://standards.ieee.org/develop/wg.html) use "working groups" as > well. For another, being able to talk about working groups as opposed > to, for instance, the Internet Area Working Group, is useful. > > In this case, the RFC Editor will stick with the CMOS guidelines about > capitalization, which summarized say that when used as a proper noun, we > will capitalize it. When used as a common noun, we won't. > > Hope that helps, > Heather > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > --94eb2c1185123d4d32054d748508 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tha= t's cMOS. They use lower case for proper nouns like Internet.


On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 1= :30 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) <rse@rfc-editor.org>= wrote:
Hello all,

Interesting thread.

I am sympathetic to how capitalization rules can be confusing to
everyone (not just non-native English speakers). That said, I think
simply requiring "Working Group" in all instances is not really t= he
right approach for a variety of reasons. For one, it's really not a
unique term of art; other SDOs (e.g., IEEE - see
https://standards.ieee.org/develop/wg.html) use &= quot;working groups" as
well. For another, being able to talk about working groups as opposed
to, for instance, the Internet Area Working Group, is useful.

In this case, the RFC Editor will stick with the CMOS guidelines about
capitalization, which summarized say that when used as a proper noun, we will capitalize it. When used as a common noun, we won't.

Hope that helps,
Heather

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org<= /a>
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/list= info/rfc-interest

--94eb2c1185123d4d32054d748508-- --===============0820823582710371281== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============0820823582710371281==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Apr 18 12:54:29 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E233A127A91 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=augustcellars.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4dnlZC1zGNUt for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89FB41201F2 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30EDB80E1B; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D97B80E1B; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=augustcellars.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kir0Xh3N3xUb; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail4.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A60DB80E1A; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Content-Language: en-us DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=augustcellars.com; s=winery; c=simple/simple; t=1492545259; h=from:subject:to:date:message-id; bh=auhF1lwaqjG1J3RUzt9J59O3MH+E5P43u9b1L19CuiM=; b=ZrIBdUvkmDZANjkpOxmKfff6++iKBt4MWdzpRTfKuUntbGlzBsrfTTbO7OIWYW+ulkS34uBe213 HqSOAMBDkuzbTY2bCEwQtrswJf6uknzSjqjd0kWam4koUi7qhLrNuM5nSGxSN7t7z16IEVfeunHjI U/KcTpGQnuFZF2tiiuBfVaaBzr22CESgCMZx0HtcTEk4E1Hx2R1TjZQde/FNP7nbdezSfeOTcrG+/ v/G86Ej3Qv1G0B8k+apSewIdcyWNQRF8Ih+lFBGmC251/rD8iaiQ7f5avPfEWT4BlX43xDxAgDPp3 iSQr5CvtUTQeVpZ1OeZFGlKzkQh4JzZkA6Og== Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.1.201) by mail4.augustcellars.com (192.168.1.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:19 -0700 Received: from Hebrews (192.168.1.155) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.1.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:54:12 -0700 From: Jim Schaad To: "'Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)'" , References: <0C70AB6D-DCA0-42EF-80A9-FDD5D244F95F@vpnc.org> <4465E8C7-A700-44D8-AE2D-261C868FFC3E@vpnc.org> <0D97AD42-B9FF-400D-95AE-2E7A974D51BE@gmail.com> <3298A017-CC76-4D8D-97A8-7561DE3D0443@att.com> <54fbdca9-5e46-5864-4310-a75d4a4c254b@gmail.com> <5a3d7c49-79af-5252-1441-8b939b75858b@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <5a3d7c49-79af-5252-1441-8b939b75858b@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:44:02 -0700 Message-ID: <008f01d2b87c$2268e180$673aa480$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQIU56AXfYMrAGXPyXs5n45ND3BagAKZcR5sAnM5KMYCjrbO/QDcsk7KAzI3xxEBROf1aQGXJNNnAV70LCYCCvIuEQI4B8qeAxhI6iMCF1ZHcAH1vctcoGy7jVA= X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.155] Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor? I remember burning into a CMOS when I was young -----Original Message----- From: rfc-interest [mailto:rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org] On Behalf Of Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:30 AM To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Capitalization of "working group" Hello all, Interesting thread. I am sympathetic to how capitalization rules can be confusing to everyone (not just non-native English speakers). That said, I think simply requiring "Working Group" in all instances is not really the right approach for a variety of reasons. For one, it's really not a unique term of art; other SDOs (e.g., IEEE - see https://standards.ieee.org/develop/wg.html) use "working groups" as well. For another, being able to talk about working groups as opposed to, for instance, the Internet Area Working Group, is useful. In this case, the RFC Editor will stick with the CMOS guidelines about capitalization, which summarized say that when used as a proper noun, we will capitalize it. When used as a common noun, we won't. Hope that helps, Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest