3 ms·
SHOULD generally means: some people might require it. implement it for best results backward compatibility makes it hard to add MUST. using SHOULD is a good al
by spongebobstoes 8mo ago
SHOULD generally means: some people might require it. implement it for best results
backward compatibility makes it hard to add MUST. using SHOULD is a good alternative
- Brian_K_White 8mo ago"SHOULD generally means: some people might require it." No it absolutely does not mean that. It means, by explicit definition which is right here, that text is exactly that definition, that no one requires it. They can't require it, and still be conforming to the spec or rfc. That's the entire point of that text is to define that and remove all ambiguity about it. It's not required by anyone. The reason it's there at all, and has "should" is that it's useful and helpful and good to include, all else being equal. But by the very definition itself, no people require it. No people are allowed to require it. Any that do, are simply violating the spec.
- spongebobstoes 8mo agothe spec doesn't include an obligation to deliver your mail. it parses fine, and is rejected by the larger system > the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed