ietf-nntp Charles's nitpicks

[Stan Barber]

Comments in Text:

Charles Lindsey wrote:

> In <20011229155302.I93705 at demon.net> "Clive D.W. Feather" <clive at demon.net> writes:
> 
> 
> 
>>Charles Lindsey said:
>>
>>>P12-2	to not require -> not to require
>>>	{split infinitive}
>>>
> 
>>What is wrong with a split infinitive ? This is English, not Latin.
>>
> 
> If you split them, you annoy some people. If you don't split them, you
> annoy nobody.


Fixed in next release of 15


> 
> 
>>>P36+1,2	to immediately determine -> immediately to determine
>>>	{split infinitive}
>>>
> 
> But I agree with Andrew that a better fix would be "to determine
> immediately".


Fixed in next release of 15


> 
> 
> 
>>>P15-18	503 -> 502
>>>	{I think so; certainly not 503}
>>>
> 
>>Which command is this ?
>>
> 
> LIST EXTENSIONS


Fixed in next release of 15.


> 
> 
> 
>>>P22+6	From: nobody at whitehouse.gov (Demo User) ->
>>>	From: "Demo User" <nobody at whitehouse.gov>
>>>	{The former usage is now deprecated both in RFC 2822 and in
>>>	USEFOR; you need to scan for all occurrences of "Demo User" to fix
>>>	it}
>>>
> 
>>Could we also switch to a ".invalid" address ?
>>
> 
> Actually no. ".example" is the proper way to do it (and USEFOR
> consistently does so).


I will be revising the examples to be consistent with RFC2606 and fix 
the RFC 822/2822 problems. I will be using the "example.[com|net|org]" 
versions for demo addresses. These will appear in the next release of 15.


> 
> 
> 
>>>P46+7	211 2000 3000234 3002322 -> 211 6 300234 3002322
>>>	{since you give only 6 groups in the example, the "2000" is hardly
>>>	realistic; moreover 2000 is impossible given those high/low
>>>	watermarks}
>>>
> 
>>Um, 3002322-3000234 = 2088, according to my calculator.
>>
> 
> Ah! The dangers of doing arithmetic in one's head :-) .
> But I still think it should be '6'.
> 
>  Charles> P53-1 It needs to say what timezone is to be used in the
>  Charles> DATE response.
> 
> Andrew> DATE always returns UTC.
> 
> Then it needs to say so.


I have added more text to make it clearer in the next release of 15.


> 
> 
>>>P55-20	It says there is no way to establish the server's timezone. This
>>>	would not be correct if the DATE command used the server's local
>>>	time.
>>>
> 
>>Only true if you (a) know this, (b) know the current time in UTC, and (c)
>>know that the result from DATE is reasonably accurate.
>>
> 
> Within 30 minutes would be accurate enough. But it seems that DATE is
> supposed to give you UTC, so the question no longer arises. The only real
> problem is that NEWNEWS uses server's local time by default which is
> stupid, but too late to change it now.



Agreed.


> 
> 
>>[Various syntax issues]
>>
> 
>>I thought we were ignoring the syntax section until the rest of the
>>document was about done.
>>
> 
> I had hoped that we "were about done". Anyway, now they are pointed out,
> they may as well be fixed. And the syntax of msg-id is a serious matter.
> 
> 

Yes, the msg-id problem is an important issue. I will revise the text to 
address that.