31.07.2011 11:38, John Cowan wrote:

Mykyta Yevstifeyev scripsit:

...

Sorry for cross-posting to 6 addresses :-); please send all your comments to apps-discuss@ietf.org. Note to public-iri subscribers: please have a look at Section 6. Note to register@uri.arpa subscribers: please comment Appendix A of the document. (The link to HTML version: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yevstifeyev-ftp-uri-scheme.) It's inappropriate to say that the client SHALL request a password from the user if none is supplied and the server demands one (and likewise for accounts). The client must be free to fail under such circumstances, as it may be a robot or otherwise not have a user available. Likewise with SHALL notify the user, etc. These should be changed to MAYs or SHOULDs.

I think such occurrences of SHALL will be replaced with SHOULD or non-normative "should". (I don't think 'ftp' URIs will be used with applications that have no UI; so I don't see reasons to assume they will be used in such way. But, anyway, your comment regarding SHALL is reasonable).

Editorial notes: Lots of people don't know what "ibidem" means, or even its standard abbreviation "ibid". I suggest changing the first instance to "in RFC 959", the second instance to "below", and the third instance to "in the<cwd>".

I'll make the following corrections: 1st instance - "in RFC 959" (as currently), 2nd one - "in the same document", 3rd one (I guess this is regarding ASCII) - "in RFC 959".

Note error "internalization" for "internationalization", "internalized" for "internationalized", etc.

Fixed now.

Note persistent typo "exmaple.com" for "example.com".

ACK. Thanks for reading the document. Mykyta